|
I have a thought.
Michigan has used the mercy rule, on a trial basis, as prescribed by MHSAA and NFHS.
NFHS discontinued the trial for varsity sports in Michigan, but MHSAA knew it worked and, with NFHS blessing, has allowed the mercy rule to be employed at sub-varsity levels.
If a team cannot stay within 30 points, they should strongly consider more practice, more hustle, more coaching, more after-practice parental involvment on an outdoor court.
Better teams should not be penalized to adjust their game for the practiced omissions of lesser teams.
In many cases, when the third team is beating and increasing the score delta of the opponents 1st team, then what do you do? Do you ask the winning team's third team to quit playing defense, to run another offense?
Then, where is the equality and fairness to the winning team to allow their subs to showcase their skills? Do we take it away because the losers wouldn't practice, couldn't practice, cut practice?
The score can obviously be controlled by the winning team:
Starting guards can be playing to assist the third team post players. Third string guards can be playing with 1st team post players. Winning starters do not have to shoot. Everyone on the winning team can have a good time and with this mish-mash of players, the winning bench can gain experience. It results in legally shaving points. Is that right? Is it fair to winner or loser?
Do we tell the winners to slow down their game and to forget "tuning-up" for the big game with their arch rival in two days? Do we ask them to slow down their game and to risk injury because of a change in playing tempo? That is not fair to the better team.
Put in the Mercy rule. Then, let the winning coaches decide who to play, how long to play, what defense to run. It is in the winner's control and it should be! They worked, sweat, ran, shot, got floor burns and jammed fingers for that right.
Let's quit worrying about the losers. Let them lose! Put 'em out of there misery instead of prolonging the pain.
mick
Winners and losers Whiners are not equal.
|