Story about Texas girls basketball game.

[Agrippa]

I'm linking to a news article about about Covenant private highschool forfeit its match against Dallas Acedemy. See here (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_fe_st/odd_hundred_point_shutout) for more details. Any comments you have about a team forfeiting a match due to its own 100-0 win over the other team are welcome in this thread as long as the reply follows Giant in the Playground forums code of conduct and rules of posting.

[Llama231]

0.o
Wow.
Just wow.
la li lu le lo la li lu le lo la li lu le lo
Doesn't seem like a fare matchup though...

[Copacetic]

It's shameful the score got that out of hand. That's my only thought.

[Moff Chumley]

Double you tee keeuw?

[Innis Cabal]

Its just a game :smallannoyed:

If you thought it was getting out of hand then why didn't you speak up? The real culprit here isn't the other team, its the losing team's coach for not speaking up and having the dignity to end it herself.

[snoopy13a]

Some coaches have no class and are bullies so this isn't a surprise. The principal was either embarrased when he/she found out or was under pressure to feign embarrassment. The forfeit is an attempt to save face.

A real danger in running up the score like that is the potential for fights. Being publically humilated can result in someone taking a swing at someone else. Additionally, I could see one of the coach or one of the parents of the losing team going after the coach of the winning team.

[Vuzzmop]

Some coaches have no class and are bullies so this isn't a surprise. The principal was either embarrased when he/she found out or was under pressure to feign embarrassment. The forfeit is an attempt to save face.

A real danger in running up the score like that is the potential for fights. Being publically humilated can result in someone taking a swing at someone else. Additionally, I could see one of the coach or one of the parents of the losing team going after the coach of the winning team.

And your point is? That isn't the fault of the winning team, and they shouldn't have to forfeit just because another team embarressed themselves.

[thubby]

they played the game to the best of their abilities. the other team kept fighting, so they kept winning.
i would find being patronized far worse.

[OverdrivePrime]

Eh, it's just not sporting. You end the match when the other team has no chance in hell and it ceases to become the fun contest that it's supposed to be.

They should have ended the game way before that for the same reason that you don't hunt deer with bazookas, or make middle schoolers box against Olympians. The sport should be about a competitive challenge and a contest of athletic spirit. That seems to have gone out the window very early on. Shame on the losing coach for not throwing in the towel and making the team endure that, and shame on the winning coach for not easing up and letting the less-skilled players have a shot.

[snoopy13a]

And your point is? That isn't the fault of the winning team, and they shouldn't have to forfeit just because another team embarressed themselves.

I made my point.

The winning team should have stopped pressing, switched to a zone, and not shot three pointers after building a sufficient lead (20+ points). Running a full court press while blowing out the other team is classless. Not to mention that unsportsmanlike behavior like that can result in physical violence.

[xyzzy]

Eh, it's just not sporting. You end the match when the other team has no chance in hell and it ceases to become the fun contest that it's supposed to be.

They should have ended the game way before that for the same reason that you don't hunt deer with bazookas, or make middle schoolers box against Olympians. The sport should be about a competitive challenge and a contest of athletic spirit. That seems to have gone out the window very early on. Shame on the losing coach for not throwing in the towel and making the team endure that, and shame on the winning coach for not easing up and letting the less-skilled players have a shot.

You might not hunt deer with bazookas. I, for one, love going into a custom map on Hunting Unlimited 2 and using absurd weaponry against defenseless wildlife. :smalltongue:

On-topic, however. I don't know much about the statistics that are kept in basketball, but I'm guessing individual points are --- at least somewhere --- an issue to someone, and if any of those girls are college-level in their skill then it would be dumb of them not to take every advantage to show their skill.

[Ascension]

I've never seen any problem with running up the score. If your opponents are playing like doormats they'll get stomped like doormats... that's just all there is to it.

I'd be concerned about the potential for violence if this was a public school, but we're talking private schools. I don't know about Texas, but I know in Georgia private schools' sports don't really mean much of anything. Granted, private school parents would have, on average, more influence and leverage, thus making their revenge more potent if they should choose to retaliate, but their rage likely wouldn't be as great in the first place. This is all just generalization, though.

[PhoeKun]

I've never seen any problem with running up the score. If your opponents are playing like doormats they'll get stomped like doormats... that's just all there is to it.

This is the attitude to have. The American concept of sportsmanship is baffling to me. You're not doing an opposing team any favors by pulling your punches. What does it say to them if you'll only take them seriously for a tiny percentage of the game? It is, in my opinion, vastly more humiliating than getting their best shot and being blown out of the water. In Europe, I am told, this is the attitude most commonly taken. Here, we do something almost like refusing to finish a critically wounded opponent. If you really don't want a blowout, add a mercy rule.

On a more technical note, I am having trouble fathoming this score. No matter how much disparity may have existed between the talent levels of the two teams: one hundred to zero!? I... how? Given the length of a basketball game, it is absolutely astounding that an entire team could have shot 0% throughout. No defense can accomplish that, and I would think even a quarter-hearted effort by the world's worst offense could get at least one shot to drop. Absolutely unbelievable.

[skywalker]

This is the attitude to have. The American concept of sportsmanship is baffling to me. You're not doing an opposing team any favors by pulling your punches. What does it say to them if you'll only take them seriously for a tiny percentage of the game? It is, in my opinion, vastly more humiliating than getting their best shot and being blown out of the water. In Europe, I am told, this is the attitude most commonly taken. Here, we do something almost like refusing to finish a critically wounded opponent. If you really don't want a blowout, add a mercy rule.

On a more technical note, I am having trouble fathoming this score. No matter how much disparity may have existed between the talent levels of the two teams: one hundred to zero!? I... how? Given the length of a basketball game, it is absolutely astounding that an entire team could have shot 0% throughout. No defense can accomplish that, and I would think even a quarter-hearted effort by the world's worst offense could get at least one shot to drop. Absolutely unbelievable.

Well, I'm going to disagree with you about "American Sportsmanship." The majority of Americans, at least IMO, would follow your line of thinking. And +1 to your second paragraph. That just seems silly, and I doubt the other team was really trying. How those two teams were even in the same division baffles me. And if the losing school is going to schedule teams that are that much more skilled than they are, then they need to (and obviously do, winless for 4 seasons) understand what is going to happen.

I'm curious about these people who say the game should've been ended by the winning coach. How do you propose that take place? The only way to end a game is to forfeit. The winning coach cannot decide to "take a win." The game must be played out from tip to buzzer. Now, granted, they could've all sat around and thrown the ball at the rim every time the shot clock neared zero, but it doesn't sound to me like the other team was giving up. And if the other team isn't giving up, you'd be surprised how quickly someone can catch up.

So how would you propose they end it? Would you have the winning team play token defense? The other team would've taken every opportunity to catch up.

[Cheesegear]

How those two teams were even in the same division baffles me. And if the losing school is going to schedule teams that are that much more skilled than they are, then they need to (and obviously do, winless for 4 seasons) understand what is going to happen.

When I was in Grade 8, there was very little interest in basketball for that year. As such, we only had enough players for one team. And - even though we weren't 'pure awesome!!11! - our coach put us in the A-Division because we were the only team he had.

We won a few, we lost a few. But, 100-0...Wow. That never happened to us. And I agree, how do you end a losing game? The only thing I can think of, is that the players give up and stop trying - and that only increases the score margin. For the coach to give up, probably by calling a Time-Out, and then telling the ref 'We Quit', is pretty piss-poor sportsmanship. There such things as good losers too; You never quit, even if you're losing. Have some dignity.
...Or maybe that's 'cause I'm Australian. We don't give up. Play 'til the buzzer. :smallamused:

As far as I'm concerned, score never even matters, because at the end of the round, you still only get 3 points for winning (at least in the league/s I played in). And - most of the time - the losing team can make that back. Even if the team is Undefeated All Season, they can still lose the Grand Final. And, really, that's the only game that counts. :smallbiggrin:

[Fawkes]

I'd be concerned about the potential for violence if this was a public school, but we're talking private schools. I don't know about Texas, but I know in Georgia private schools' sports don't really mean much of anything. Granted, private school parents would have, on average, more influence and leverage, thus making their revenge more potent if they should choose to retaliate, but their rage likely wouldn't be as great in the first place. This is all just generalization, though.

We do love our sports in Texas, but come on. Women's Basketball. In a private school with only 20 female students. A team that hasn't won a single game in four years.

Yeah, I don't think the threat of violence was a huge deal here.

[Zeful]

Something you guys may have missed in the 7th paragraph
The academy boasts of its small class sizes and specializes in teaching students struggling with "learning differences," such as short attention spans or dyslexia.
I'm thinking that had to do with the winning team feeling bad about winning by 100 points.

[Raiser Blade]

Forfeiting the win because they feel bad is even more humiliating to the losing team.

I mean c'mon you really think the players are going to feel any better? Fom the article it seems that the team is no stranger to losing and probably doesn't need or appeciate the gesture.

[skywalker]

...Or maybe that's 'cause I'm Australian. We don't give up. Play 'til the buzzer. :smallamused:

And then have a beer afterward? :smallwink:

I'm only going off what the American Olympic team has said about the Australians. (Namely, that they're the most fun team to be around because while they never quit, they also never quit having a good time!)

[potatocubed]

Learning difficulties or not, if you're no good at basketball you're no good at basketball.

The lesson I hope the girls draw from this is "it doesn't matter that you're no good at basketball".

The whole forfeiture thing is just condescending.

[Cheesegear]

And then have a beer afterward? :smallwink:

No, silly. Not for basketball. That's only for Rugby.

[Felixaar]

See now I read this as "Sorry about Texas Girls Basketball Game", and I expected it to be far more intriguing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to flee the horde of feminists and nuns coming forth to kill me.

*flee!*

side note; yes, we Australian's are awesome. Never give up!

[Athaniar]

Winning is bad now? It's not their fault the other team couldn't keep up with them. As long as they didn't cheat or anything like that, they should keep their victory.

[king.com]

So its ok to dimish an evidently better team and their victory, wow, no wonder people are loosing interest in sport...

[Zeful]

So its ok to dimish an evidently better team and their victory, wow, no wonder people are loosing interest in sport...

It's like the story of the 9-year-old who was forbidden from playing little league because he could reliably pitch a ~80mph fastball.

[Milanius]

WTF. A hundred to zero win margin? You know, hundred points, that much I can fathom... the other team not scoring ONCE, well that's just science fiction for me. That school obviously needs to rebuild their female b-ball team.


Learning difficulties or not, if you're no good at basketball you're no good at basketball.

The lesson I hope the girls draw from this is "it doesn't matter that you're no good at basketball".

The whole forfeiture thing is just condescending.
This is quite accurate. While the winning team could display 'chivalry' in some other way [congratulating their opponents for being brave enough to take such severe pounding] they should by no means apologize for being better and winning, even if it's 100:0.

If someone wants to feel bad about this it's probably the coaches. Winning coach, for not playing with all 12 players in 3rd and 4th quarter, for example, which would give percentage for everyone. Losing coach, for not preparing his team better and inspiring them to fight with more vigor - if he [she?] did, the losing team might've scored several times and at least they would save their face.

[KuReshtin]

I'm a bit torn on this issue.

On one side, I agree that if you can't put up a challenge and get blown out because of it, then so be it. it's not the winning team's fault for your ineptitude. If they can't stop you, then that's their problem.
I've been on the losing side in a few of those games myself, and although it's not fun, it all depends on how the opposing (winning) team conducts themselves as to whether the losing team feels it's been humiliated or not. Yes, it's demoralising to lose by huge margins, but if the team hasn't won a game in four years, this can't have been the only game in those four years that they've lost by huge margins, surely?

On the other hand, the mention that the winning team, even after being up by 59-0 at the half still kept full-court press defense and still went for 3-pointers seems to be one of those times when the conduct of the winning team seems wrong to me. If they were 59 points ahead at the half, they could have gone back to zone defense and went for two-pointers instead, sent the backups into the game to get some game time and tried to wind the clock down a bit more. Of course, sending in the backups to get game time usually mens that they want to prove themselves, which can end up with the exact opposite result of the intention.

On the third hand (or first foot, or whatever), the team let off when they had reached the century, so getting to the 100 might be a team goal for every game they play (some coaches set goals for their teams besidses winning) and once they reached that goal, they let off.

The humiliation in this story is that the head of the school decided that she needed to apologize for the win.

[late for dinner]

I made my point.

The winning team should have stopped pressing, switched to a zone, and not shot three pointers after building a sufficient lead (20+ points). Running a full court press while blowing out the other team is classless. Not to mention that unsportsmanlike behavior like that can result in physical violence.

my dad and I were talking about that last night. The winning coach should have changed the game plan for sure...full court press was the wrong way to go after the first half. 52-0 is a sure victory.

[Oregano]

Getting violent over it would be silly as is claiming they should have stopped. It's all a bit of fun. I remember having a rugby match with my school once and we'd never really played anyone else before and they were the best around, they absolutely slaughtered us, but we kept playing, it was fun and there were no hard feelings, we all shook hands at the end. But maybe that's just our way of doing things.

[late for dinner]

Getting violent over it would be silly as is claiming they should have stopped. It's all a bit of fun. I remember having a rugby match with my school once and we'd never really played anyone else before and they were the best around, they absolutely slaughtered us, but we kept playing, it was fun and there were no hard feelings, we all shook hands at the end. But maybe that's just our way of doing things.

Hate to say it, but in America, people take offense to everything...I think it's a new fad. I personally believe that winning 100 to 0 was fine; how often are you gonna win 100-0? But the way they did it was unsportsman like for sure. Full Court press is a very agressive defense where you are pretty much trying to steal the ball from the inbound pass until you actually get it back. You give no room to breath to the other team...even the Pistons from the NBA (first team that comes to mind when I think of the FC Press) change the defense later in the game if the score is a blow out either way

[Telonius]

Bad stuff all around in that article. The losing team shouldn't have even been scheduled against the winning team. There should have been a mercy rule in place. The winning team should have backed off the fullcourt press when they were up by 40 or so and it was clear the other team was incapable of doing anything. And the coach of the winning team should have put in the third-stringers regardless.

Yeah, it's true that if you don't want somebody running up the score on you, you shouldn't let them. But that's for when you lose by something like 80-40. Losing 100-0 is in a whole different universe. Not to mention how totally silly it was for the coach to keep up that press. The winning team's players weren't going to learn anything, or become better players, by doing that. The only thing it would do would be to increase the possibility for somebody getting injured - and I'm not even talking about somebody taking a swing. Keeping up a FC press for the whole game usually takes a lot of athletic ability. I would think that those girls would be really tired at the end of it, and pushing yourself too hard really does lead to injuries.

[Tirian]

I wonder if the desire to forfeit, aside from acknowledging a lack of honorable behavior, has something to do with wanting the stats of the game to be wiped out. If your school's old record for a single-game scorer was 35 points in a monumental game when your team was that good, do you want a new plaque to be placed in your trophy case never to be removed by a 60 point effort because you were playing against a team that was that bad? Plus imagine that the top scorer on the team was in the hunt for most points scored in a district-wide competition; the opportunity to play in a massacre like this is unfair to all of the players whose schedules are balanced and seems likely to lead to an escalation of humiliations against weak teams.

[snoopy13a]

On a more technical note, I am having trouble fathoming this score. No matter how much disparity may have existed between the talent levels of the two teams: one hundred to zero!? I... how? Given the length of a basketball game, it is absolutely astounding that an entire team could have shot 0% throughout. No defense can accomplish that, and I would think even a quarter-hearted effort by the world's worst offense could get at least one shot to drop. Absolutely unbelievable.

Presumbly, the losing team didn't have anyone who could handle the ball. The winning team pressed and forced turnovers many of them leading to easy layups. The losing team probably had very few shots.

Maybe the refs should have intervened and called ticky tack fouls on the winning team until they stopped pressing. This would have also helped the losing team to get into a bonus situation where they would have the chance to shoot foul shots to at least score some points.

*As for FC press taking up a lot of energy, that is true. However, most pressing teams go deeper into the bench than teams that do not. A team that full court presses might have a 10 person rotation as opposed to a slower paced team that may only have a 7 person rotation. That's why I like the full court press because it gives more kids on the team more playing time and it puts pressure on the opponent.

[Zen Monkey]

I don't see how the subject of "American" sportsmanship enters into the discussion, rather than the basic subject of humanity. A school with sufficient resources and a high level of skill maintained their top effort against competition with fewer resources, almost no skill, and various handicaps. They continued to play at 100% even when they realized the huge disparity. This isn't a matter of bringing your A-game against a worthy competitor, this is Mike Tyson going to the special olympics and beating some poor kid into the canvas. Then, when the kid is on the floor and hurt, Mike dances some victory laps around him and keeps punching him in the head. But apparently old Iron Mike wouldn't have to apologize for this, and should continue the assault at full power while we criticize the the guy on the ground.

[skywalker]

The coach has been fired.


I don't see how the subject of "American" sportsmanship enters into the discussion, rather than the basic subject of humanity. A school with sufficient resources and a high level of skill maintained their top effort against competition with fewer resources, almost no skill, and various handicaps. They continued to play at 100% even when they realized the huge disparity. This isn't a matter of bringing your A-game against a worthy competitor, this is Mike Tyson going to the special olympics and beating some poor kid into the canvas. Then, when the kid is on the floor and hurt, Mike dances some victory laps around him and keeps punching him in the head. But apparently old Iron Mike wouldn't have to apologize for this, and should continue the assault at full power while we criticize the the guy on the ground.

Thanks for putting words in everyone's mouths. Your analogy is also wrong. This isn't Iron Mike going to the Special Olympics. This is a Special Olympics kid getting in the pro ring with Mike.

Nobody (none of the news articles) said any of the players for Dallas Academy had learning disabilities. It said that Dallas Academy is renowned for working with those sorts of kids. But none of the articles has said any of the players had those, which makes me think they're trying to imply something without saying it, probably because they can't truthfully say that the DA players were learning disabled.

In a new article (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/012609dnspocovenantnu.2781526.html), it is revealed that Covenant actually stopped the full court press 3 minutes into the game, which is agreed upon by both coaches. The quarter by quarter score is also revealed, which makes it seem like perhaps the coach is less at fault. My personal opinion is that the players themselves thought "hey, we can get to 100!" The coach only has so much control over his players, especially on a team of 8. You can't even bench all the starters.

I still think it's more humiliating to let the losers line up and shoot layups (which is what I would do! Play to the whistle!) than to keep treating them as legitimate opponents. But seriously, no points? The coach says that he thinks his team got 7 shots all game. Going 0-7 isn't uncommon at all, but why on Earth would you schedule a game against an opponent that holds you to 7 shots?!

Covenant's story is also interesting. 2-19 to a title contender? And they've got 8 players? You're certainly putting high schoolers in a tough position, some of them perhaps having been on that 2-19 team. An opportunity to score an easy 100? For a team that is constantly slugging it out with teams of probably 10-12 girls? There's so much more to this than just "hey, we're gonna go beat up those special kids!"

Lastly, I think there's some very pertinent (but out of bounds) religious context at the end of the article I linked.

[Tirian]

Thanks for putting words in everyone's mouths. Your analogy is also wrong. This isn't Iron Mike going to the Special Olympics. This is a Special Olympics kid getting in the pro ring with Mike.

No, it really isn't. It's high school intramural sports. It's everyone in the local district getting together and participating in an extracurricular activity, getting exercise and demonstrating positive school spirit, learning athleticism, teamwork, and sportsmanship. Recognizing excellence in individuals and teams through winning records and playoffs is a goal, but it's honestly pretty low down on the list.

The worst sort of decision that you could make is that Dallas Academy shouldn't be playing in this game because they're not any good. What's the alternative? Would you rather they not be allowed to play basketball in public until they bulk up a bit, or do you think they need to get in their bus and drive fifty miles to find another horrible team and compete for championship of the Z division? All the stories that I've seen indicate that they already know how to lose a game by a wide margin with dignity. I think that the only thing that is lacking is for the district to give some guidance on how teams should win a game by a large margin with dignity. I'm all for a mercy rule, especially if the teams are so small that you don't have third-stringers to insert.

Also, just to clarify the story, the first article made a point of saying that Dallas Academy had a total enrollment of twenty students, so you're probably not on the right track by suggesting that they have a large number of learning-disabled students but a fully-able eight player basketball team. But I haven't followed the story enough to know for certain.

[skywalker]

No, it really isn't. It's high school intramural sports. It's everyone in the local district getting together and participating in an extracurricular activity, getting exercise and demonstrating positive school spirit, learning athleticism, teamwork, and sportsmanship. Recognizing excellence in individuals and teams through winning records and playoffs is a goal, but it's honestly pretty low down on the list.

I'm sorry, I think recognizing excellence is a lot higher up the list than you think. And while you might think that all that other stuff is more important, I know plenty of people who think winning isn't everything, it's the only thing. Also, it's intermural sports. Intramural sports are sports played within the school. I was trying to make the Mike Tyson analogy work. And I think that's the best example. Whoever scheduled the game from Dallas Academy ought to be fired, not the coach at Covenant Christian.


The worst sort of decision that you could make is that Dallas Academy shouldn't be playing in this game because they're not any good. What's the alternative? Would you rather they not be allowed to play basketball in public until they bulk up a bit, or do you think they need to get in their bus and drive fifty miles to find another horrible team and compete for championship of the Z division? All the stories that I've seen indicate that they already know how to lose a game by a wide margin with dignity. I think that the only thing that is lacking is for the district to give some guidance on how teams should win a game by a large margin with dignity. I'm all for a mercy rule, especially if the teams are so small that you don't have third-stringers to insert.

Well, if we're going to whine about how the A division beat the crap out of them, then yes, they ought to be in the Z division. Don't make the A division feel bad for being the A division. Our culture these days has become one of "don't be too good kids, or it will hurt the other kids' feelings." :smallyuk:

Where do you draw the line? Is a 100-0 loss any worse than a 59-0 loss? How would you recommend the winners act differently?


Also, just to clarify the story, the first article made a point of saying that Dallas Academy had a total enrollment of twenty students, so you're probably not on the right track by suggesting that they have a large number of learning-disabled students but a fully-able eight player basketball team. But I haven't followed the story enough to know for certain.

The 8 player team was Covenant Christian. No number of players is listed for Dallas Academy. But if the team is made up of "learning disabled" kids, first of all, why didn't the article say that? It certainly implies it, but both articles I read stopped short of actually labelling any players "learning disabled." Why?

[KuReshtin]

I'm going to nitpick on one thing here in your post, skywalker.


The 8 player team was Covenant Christian. No number of players is listed for Dallas Academy. But if the team is made up of "learning disabled" kids, first of all, why didn't the article say that? It certainly implies it, but both articles I read stopped short of actually labelling any players "learning disabled." Why?

The original link provided in this thread actually states that it is the Dallas Academy team that has 8 players.
Quoted from the original article:



Dallas Academy has eight girls on its varsity team and about 20 girls in its high school.

Also, just because it was made a point of mentioning that Dallas Academy specializes in kids with 'learning disabilities' doesn't mean that those kids are physically disabled. Again, quoted from the original article:



"learning differences," such as short attention spans or dyslexia.

Now, I'm no expert, but I've never heard of an instance where having difficulties reading would prevent you from being a good basketball player.

i've read a few more articles about this and also watched a few news reports, and while almost all of the reports mention the 'learning differences' of the students of Dallas Academy, they also state that out of the 20 girls enrolled eligible to play for the basketball team, 8 of them are playing "most of them never having played before".

No apology was issued from the Covenant School until the story made national and international news about the 100-0 shutout almost a week after the game was played (game was played on Thursday Jan 15th according to the DA website posting the schedule).
Now, if they thought it was such an 'embarrassment' and 'without honour', why would it take them almost a full week to look for the forfeit? As far as I can tell, the news broke on Wednesday Jan 21st with reports stating that Covenant school officials visited DA to offer the apology on Thursday, Jan 22.

From all the reports I've read, and the statements from the Dallas Academy, it seems that they don't (officially, anyways) care about the attention and that they only want it to blow over.

Why not just let it? ther high school basketball scores in the past few weeks have ended at similarly lopsided scores, with the only difference being that the opposition scored a handful of points. I believe some scorelines were of the effect of 107-5 and 105-9 or something. However, no one has started an outrage at the 'running up of the score' in those games. I wonder why?

Can it be because the media found that a team from a school that prides themselves in dealing with students with 'learning differences' got crushed by a team from a school that don't mention anything about their students having 'learning differences'.
Sensationalist news reporting just to have a story of the bad bullies beating up on the 'poor defenseless team'.

Like I said in my first post, the most embarrassing thing about this story is the fact that the Covenant School officials thought they'd need to apologize for the win.

[skywalker]

"Learning disabilities" can have a tremendous impact on a person's ability to learn the game of basketball. It is, after all, something you learn. If the coach is trying to explain a box and one zone and the power forward is going "ooh, pretty clouds" through the window (and it's not an NBA game) then the team is probably not going to be as effective as the team where the power forward is thinking "yes, kill anybody who drives the lane, yes."

[Jalor]

There's no reason for this to even be an issue. One team won, the other lost. That's life. Deal with it.