If you can't beat 'em... quit

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

So did they wind up winning State?

Ridgefield Press
Mar 9, 2006
Coach Quits: Basketball controversy at high school

After the first eight minutes, the teams were tied. During the next three quarters, the Ridgefield High boys basketball team lost the game, its berth in the state tournament and, now, its head coach.

Ray Bielizna resigned Tuesday morning amid allegations that he purposely didn’t use his best players for much of the final regular-season game against Bassick-Bridgeport on Feb. 22. The 73-51 loss had positive implications for the Tigers, dropping them from the state tournament’s toughest bracket, Division I, into the less competitive Division II.

If Ridgefield had won the game it would have remained in Division I and Bassick, ironically, would have been in Division II. The Ridgefield loss elevated Bassick into Division I — a loss to Ridgefield would have kept Bassick in Division II.

Mr. Bielizna, who didn’t return several phone calls for this story, has been quoted in other published reports as saying he was aware of the post-season benefits from a loss to Bassick but that he didn’t act on them. He said his goal was merely to rest his top players, some of whom were suffering from nagging injuries, for both the conference and state tournaments and to give younger team members playing time.

Acting on information provided from what they described as a reliable source, officials from the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference, the state’s governing sports body, called Ridgefield High Principal Dr. Dianna Lindsay last Friday morning and asked her to investigate the matter. Mike Savage, an executive director with the CIAC, said Dr. Lindsay called him back within a few hours to confirm the claim that Ridgefield didn’t try its hardest to win the Bassick game. Mr. Savage would not comment when asked if Dr. Lindsay told him that Mr. Bielizna had admitted to her that he wanted to lose to Bassick. Mr. Savage said that Dr. Lindsay’s initial suggestion was to let the Ridgefield team play in Division II but suspend Mr. Bielizna for one game. When CIAC officials rejected that proposal as being too lenient, the two sides agreed to withdraw Ridgefield from the state tournament.

The Tigers were scheduled to play Career Magnet of New Haven in a first-round Division II game Tuesday night at home. Career Magnet was awarded a forfeit victory and automatically advanced to the second round. Mr. Bielizna gave his resignation letter to Ridgefield school officials on Tuesday morning. He will continue as a math teacher at the high school.

Members of the Ridgefield High team, many of whom found out about the decision while at a school dance Friday night, said they were stunned. “Disappointment and shock,” was how Joe Wolff, one of the team’s six seniors described his reaction. “We’ve had a great season — the team won 14 of 20 regular-season games before losing in the FCIAC quarterfinals — and now we don’t get a chance to play in States. It doesn’t seem fair to any of us.”

Mr. Wolff said the players were aware a defeat to Bassick would drop them to Division II — an assistant coach had told them — but that they didn’t play to lose. “That’s ridiculous,” he said. “The guys who were on the floor were trying their hardest. There is no way anyone can say we weren’t trying to win that game.”

After going most of the season with seven regulars, the Tigers played four seldom-used players and one who had not seen any varsity action against Bassick. That irregular substitution pattern caught the eye of several FCIAC coaches, who reported their concerns to the conference’s executive secretary, John Kuczo. Mr. Kuczo then called Mr. Savage to voice his concerns. “We felt there was enough credibility to the claims to investigate,” said Mr. Savage. “We did not want the integrity of the state tournament to be compromised. That’s why we called Ridgefield High School and asked them to look into it. “When Dr. Lindsay called us back, she verified our concerns and we sought a solution,” added Mr. Savage. “We felt that having the team withdraw from the state tournament was a proper resolution.” Dr. Lindsay did not return several phone calls for this story. Dr. Kenneth Freeston, the superintendent of Ridgefield schools, said Dr. Lindsay’s suggestion, that the team be allowed to play in the state tournament without Mr. Bielizna as head coach, was rejected by the CIAC. “We didn’t want the team punished,” said Dr. Freeston. “But the state thought taking them out of the tournament was the best way to approach it.” “This was a serious matter, and we admire the quick response from the Ridgefield principal, superintendent and athletic director (Rod Mergardt),” said Mr. Savage. “We’re satisfied with the way they handled things.”

The state basketball tournament was altered before the 2003-04 season. Rather than group teams based on school enrollment, the format was redesigned based on a point system, with the aim to place all the state’s top teams in one division regardless of school size. Under this scenario, Division I is considered the state’s toughest, with the next three divisions dropping off in quality. Teams must win 40% of their games to make the state tournament. Mr. Savage said the CIAC and the boys basketball committee were aware that the new system had an inherent design flaw: Teams could lose on purpose to move down to a weaker division. “It’s something we talked about and hoped wouldn’t happen,” he said. “Now, after this, I’m sure there will be discussion about ways to change the tournament again. We can oversee a lot of things, but we can’t legislate ethics.”

[BillyMac]

CIAC changes boys basketball tourney format
By: Joe Morelli, Journal Register News Service
07/27/2006

The CIAC boys' basketball tournament committee heard the outcry from basketball coaches, athletic directors and principals alike and made some significant changes to the format.

Gone is the power-points system that caused so much controversy to the point that one school, Ridgefield, forfeited from last year's tournament after the Tigers sat out players in the final game to potentially lose a game on purpose. Back in is the class enrollment system (Class LL through S) with a few notable exceptions. First and foremost, private and magnet schools' enrollment will be doubled that of the public schools because of those schools' abilities to draw from numerous towns. "Mike (Savage, the CIAC executive director) has access to all of the state's policies (for boys' basketball)," said Dr. Edward Goldstone, chairperson of the boys' basketball committee. "Apparently, many states do factor that in." So for instance, if a private school has 140 boys, the school will now have 280 points. Another factor is recent success in the state tournament. A school will receive an extra 10 points each time its team reaches the state tournament semifinals on any level. A finalist receives 25 points while a state champion gets 50. So take, for example, Trinity Catholic-Stamford won back-to-back state titles under two different formats in 2003-04 and lost in the final in 2005. That's an additional 125 points for the Crusaders, a Class S school by strict enrollment.

Teams in smaller divisions can once again choose to play in the Class LL state tournament only. Requests must be made in writing to the CIAC by Oct. 1. The other classes will not be re-balanced if schools opt to move up. "The whole idea is to recreate the brackets once the season started and have those brackets be as equitable as possible, given the fact our last attempt at doing that underwent a lot of criticism," Goldstone said. Although the power-points system created an impressive Division I tournament, it allowed larger schools to drop into smaller divisions with subpar seasons. It also allowed schools to potentially manipulate the system, like Ridgefield apparently did when it lost its regular-season finale to Bassick-Bridgeport and dropped from Division I to Division II. When impropriety was discovered, Ridgefield forfeited out of the tournament. "I personally thought (the power-points format) was very good," Goldstone said. "I thought the issue of manipulation became so controversial that (the CIAC) Board of Control felt no matter how well-meaning the format was, it did lead to problems. Having all divisions pre-determined before the season started and having that success factor was crucial in providing an extra level of balance. But the strength of schedule is no longer a factor." This format will be in place for two years. Classes for the 2006-2007 state tournament will be available in September.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Members of the Ridgefield High team, many of whom found out about the decision while at a school dance Friday night, said they were stunned. “Disappointment and shock,” was how Joe Wolff, one of the team’s six seniors described his reaction. “We’ve had a great season — the team won 14 of 20 regular-season games before losing in the FCIAC quarterfinals — and now we don’t get a chance to play in States. It doesn’t seem fair to any of us.”

So they punish the kids for something they thought the coach did. Brilliant. If I was a parent of one of those kids, my first call would have been to a lawyer.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Mr. Wolff said the players were aware a defeat to Bassick would drop them to Division II — an assistant coach had told them — but that they didn’t play to lose. “That’s ridiculous,” he said. “The guys who were on the floor were trying their hardest. There is no way anyone can say we weren’t trying to win that game.”

After going most of the season with seven regulars, the Tigers played four seldom-used players and one who had not seen any varsity action against Bassick.

Contradiction?

Politics......

Sad.

[refaholic2]

I agree with Padgett that this was a very poor solution to the problem. Why would you punish the kids for the mistake of the coach. Like the one kid said, the players that were on the floor was playing their hardest. IMO, the obvious answer would have been to put them in the Div I tourny and let them play.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by refaholic2

I agree with Padgett that this was a very poor solution to the problem. Why would you punish the kids for the mistake of the coach. Like the one kid said, the players that were on the floor was playing their hardest. IMO, the obvious answer would have been to put them in the Div I tourny and let them play.

Are you absolutely, 100% sure none of the kids involved knew anything about it? Are you, without any doubt whatsoever, sure that none of the kids knew about what the loss would mean in terms of which division they would end up playing in? And, that if they did know, are you sure they made their feelings known to the coach that this was the wrong way to approach the game? Or did they sit back and accept what was happening? I don't completely buy into the fact the kids are 100% innocent and only the victims in this situation.

Even if there is the outside chance every single member of the team was completely unaware of the situation, Cameron still has the point that this is a team sport, and it is the team that is penalized accordingly. When you look at the name that gets engraved on the trophy, you only see the team name, not any of the individual names. So everyone, from coaches on down to the last player on the bench, contribute to both the success and failure of the team. How is this situation different than giving the other team FT's for a T because of the unsporting actions of their coach? The kids have been totally respectful all game, yet they are penalized for the actions of their coach.

Yes, it sucks for those players. But the team has been penalized for the actions of one; no different than a T. Just like the team would benefit from one player hitting the game-winning shot at the buzzer - everyone wins, including the coach, for the actions of that one player. Those are the advantages and disadvantages of playing on a team.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Mr. Wolff said the players were aware a defeat to Bassick would drop them to Division II — an assistant coach had told them — but that they didn’t play to lose. “That’s ridiculous,” he said. “The guys who were on the floor were trying their hardest. There is no way anyone can say we weren’t trying to win that game.”

After going most of the season with seven regulars, the Tigers played four seldom-used players and one who had not seen any varsity action against Bassick. That irregular substitution pattern caught the eye of several FCIAC coaches, ...

Classic example of the coach using faulty logic for his argument. No one accused the players of trying to lose. It was the coach's "irregular substitution pattern" that got them in trouble. And then he acts all innocent...

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

Classic example of the coach using faulty logic for his argument. No one accused the players of trying to lose.

My point exactly, Juulie. Yet the players were penalized even though none of them, regardless of their position on the team, did anything wrong. What a lesson to teach kids - your supervisor does something wrong - there's nothing you can do about it - you get punished.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

My point exactly, Juulie. Yet the players were penalized even though none of them, regardless of their position on the team, did anything wrong. What a lesson to teach kids - your supervisor does something wrong - there's nothing you can do about it - you get punished.

And exacly how do you propose penalizing teams/schools who do have a reason to be penalized? They are a TEAM...including the coach. The coach breaks the rules, the team is penalized. They should blame him.

This is no different than a star player on the team getting suspended from some infraction (perhaps fighting) and not being able to participate in a playoff game....and the team loses. Those kids felt the effects of a consequence even though they did nothing wrong.

The nature of teams sports is that the team both wins and loses togther as well as suffers the consequences of the actions of members of the team (and staff).