161-2

[Nevadaref]

Nobody Wins When The Final Score Is 161-2
Ron Dicker
The Huffington Post Posted: 01/11/15 03:05 PM ET Updated: 01/11/15 03:59 PM ET
Lopsided doesn't begin to describe this.

Arroyo Valley High School defeated Bloomington High 161-2 in a Southern California girls basketball game Monday. But Bloomington's coach said Arroyo Valley's coach lost at sportsmanship.

“People shouldn’t feel sorry for my team," Bloomington coach Dale Chung told the San Bernardino Sun. "They should feel sorry for his team, which isn’t learning the game the right way.”


Arroyo Valley coach Michael Anderson said he kept out his starters for the entire second half and told players not to shoot until late in the shot clock, the Sun reported. “I didn’t expect them (Bloomington) to be that bad," he said. "I’m not trying to embarrass anybody."

The extreme blowout caught the attention of school administrators. Arroyo Valley athletic director Matt Howell, who did not attend the game, told the Press Enterprise, "I have had a conversation with my coach about it and that kind of thing. It's not going to happen again."

High school basketball has produced some notable routs in recent memory. In 2012, an Indianapolis game ended in a 107-2 score. In 2009, a Texas high school coach was fired after his team won, 100-0.

[johnny d]

I don't see a problem with this, especially if the winning coach was playing his bench players. Why should those players who rarely ever see the court be told not to try to score or play defense in a game where they are getting a lot of playing time. The losing coach should stop whining like a baby and coach his team to play better. Now if the winning coach has his starters in and is full court pressing for the entire game, someone might want to have a talk with him.

[LRZ]

I did not realize that several states use a shot clock.

[HokiePaul]

Sounds like a good argument not to have a shot clock in HS. Let the team pass the ball around for 3 minutes if they want.

Assuming the winning coach emptied his bench, didn't full court press in the second half, and had most of the half scoring come from backups, I don't think there's a problem.

[Nevadaref]

A HS game in CA has 32 minutes of playing time. There is a 30 second shot clock and no 10 second count in the backcourt for girls games.
There is also a running clock mercy rule if the lead is 40+ points in the 4th quarter.

To score 161 a team would need to score an average of 5 points each minute.
Does anyone think they weren't playing full-court defense?

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

A HS game in CA has 32 minutes of playing time. There is a 30 second shot clock and no 10 second count in the backcourt for girls games.
There is also a running clock mercy rule if the lead is 40+ points in the 4th quarter.

To score 161 a team would need to score an average of 5 points each minute.
Does anyone think they weren't playing full-court defense?

My guess would be that they averaged closer to 6 or 7 pts per minute in the first half with starters (and full court press), and 3 or 4 points per minute in the second half with backups and no backcourt press. If they were pressing into the second half then I would have to agree with the losing coach that sportsmanship was not demonstrated.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't see a problem with this, especially if the winning coach was playing his bench players. Why should those players who rarely ever see the court be told not to try to score or play defense in a game where they are getting a lot of playing time. The losing coach should stop whining like a baby and coach his team to play better. Now if the winning coach has his starters in and is full court pressing for the entire game, someone might want to have a talk with him.

The score was 161-2. let me REPEAT that 161-2. there is no reason EVER to win a game by 159 points…they should have stopped at 100..:roll eyes:

when one team is that bad it is not competition. none of the players on the winning team are going to get better at basketball or learn anything about Xs and 0s from that mess. including bench players. so take the time to teach a life lesson--lesson being that it isn't necessary to utterly destroy someone else just because you can…

i understand your point--but it was 161-2...

[Mark Padgett]

Perhaps the winning coach had his players continue to score to avoid the possibility of OT!

Good for him.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BigCat

The score was 161-2. let me REPEAT that 161-2. there is no reason EVER to win a game by 159 points…they should have stopped at 100..:roll eyes:

when one team is that bad it is not competition. none of the players on the winning team are going to get better at basketball or learn anything about Xs and 0s from that mess. including bench players. so take the time to teach a life lesson--lesson being that it isn't necessary to utterly destroy someone else just because you can…

i understand your point--but it was 161-2...

How's this for a life lesson, if you are so bad at basketball that you are going to get beat 161-2, then maybe you should find something else to do with your time because you cannot play basketball. Or would you rather have them grow up thinking they can be anything they want including a professional basketball player, instead of realizing not everyone has the ability to be a rocket scientist.

[Pantherdreams]

Not saying this is the case.

If the coach played his bench kids (when it was clear to see the game was out of reach - which was probably well before half time), if they stopped pressing, and theycan still win by 100 or 150 or whatever. I don't think the coach of the winning team can be faulted.

I don't see a team playing keep away (with or without a shot clock) or not letting your bench kids run the floor to score, take layups or defend properly fair or equitable either. THey are bad so, so you have to be bad isn't right. You can work on your quarter court zone or whatever. If you bench kids get a chance to play and score its on the other coach to have 5 kids better then your worst 5.

At the point where everyone possible is in the game, you've backed your defense up to quarter court and given them the opportunity to execute 5 on 5: thats it they've met their obligation to sportsmanship. Holding the ball or letting the other team shoot should be more embarassing to kids on the floor then being beaten or scored on. . . . I would think.

In the case in the OP it sounds like the game was well on its way to out of hand well before half time so the starters IMO should have been out way before then. No mention of whether pressing happened to what extent but to get that many possessions even against a bad team you can assume they pressed most of the game. So I'm not defending the coach just talking about the situation as a generality.

[Pantherdreams]

http://www.dailybulletin.com/sports/...-to-be-learned

Link above brings a little more clarity and probably a lot less sympathy for the winning coach.

Highlights:

- was up 104-1 at half time before the starters were pulled.
- Pressed and trapped full court or half court all game.
- Running clock after the first quarter.
- Bench players held the ball on offense for 23 of 30 second shot clock before shootingin the 2nd half.
- Of 15 exhibition games scheduled record is 14-1 with wins that include 98, 80 and 3 in the 70' as well.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't see a problem with this, especially if the winning coach was playing his bench players. Why should those players who rarely ever see the court be told not to try to score or play defense in a game where they are getting a lot of playing time. The losing coach should stop whining like a baby and coach his team to play better. Now if the winning coach has his starters in and is full court pressing for the entire game, someone might want to have a talk with him.

Normally I'd agree with you, but as was pointed out later in the thread, the math doesn't add up here, especially with the mercy rule in the 4th. It's one thing to let your bench players work on offense. It's another to have them needlessly press the whole game, and surely there must have been some of that going on.

Originally Posted by LRZ

I did not realize that several states use a shot clock.

"Only eight states (California, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota and Washington) allow unlimited use of a 30- or 35-second shot clock, and that breach of NFHS rules denies them a position on the Basketball Rules Committee."

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/high...asketball.html

See also: http://www.maxpreps.com/news/pewg4Mb...re-scoring.htm

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by johnny d

How's this for a life lesson, if you are so bad at basketball that you are going to get beat 161-2, then maybe you should find something else to do with your time because you cannot play basketball. Or would you rather have them grow up thinking they can be anything they want including a professional basketball player, instead of realizing not everyone has the ability to be a rocket scientist.

Well Johnny,

I have to say I was only thinking about the lesson to the winning team--im not a rocket scientist…there are definitely some lessons to be learned for the losing side as well. i'm ok with them growing up thinking they can be anything, including a professional basketball player…in fact, id want them to dream... even if they are losing 161-2. i would, however, be sure to emphasize the need for a "fallback option"…just in case the NBA didn't work out…

we've made our points--in the word of Jrut--Peace

[JRutledge]

One more reason to never work girls basketball.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

One more reason to never work girls basketball.

Peace

Unfortunately, we don't have that option in some states (e.g. South Carolina).