What Would Be a Commie Take on This?

[Bud Struggle]

Do you think it's OK in a game like this for one side to humiliate the other side so completely? Or would Communists agree with the Christians that competition can go overboard?

DALLAS — The coach of a Texas high school basketball team that beat another team 100-0 was fired Sunday, the same day he sent an e-mail to a newspaper saying he will not apologize "for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with honor and integrity."


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,482825,00.html

[StalinFanboy]

The point of the games is to win, yes?


I don't see why the Jesustards are getting so upset over this, unless the winning team were being douche bags about their massacre of the opposing team.

[danyboy27]

Do you think it's OK in a game like this for one side to humiliate the other side so completely? Or would Communists agree with the Christians that competition can go overboard?

DALLAS — The coach of a Texas high school basketball team that beat another team 100-0 was fired Sunday, the same day he sent an e-mail to a newspaper saying he will not apologize "for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with honor and integrity."


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,482825,00.html

there is a japanese custom that says when you play with someone weaker than you, you must let him gain a certain advance both to gain his respect and to have the hope to play with him again.

[Dean]

Do you think it's OK in a game like this for one side to humiliate the other side so completely? Or would Communists agree with the Christians that competition can go overboard?

DALLAS — The coach of a Texas high school basketball team that beat another team 100-0 was fired Sunday, the same day he sent an e-mail to a newspaper saying he will not apologize "for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with honor and integrity."


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,482825,00.html

It depends. If they truly are humiliated and not having a good time, then there is a problem of course. As communists, we oppose any serious or excessive competition anyways. Many Christian messages about humility and 'tenderness'/sensitivity are applicable to communist attitudes, or at least they should be.

[butterfly]

Why would they fire him?

[rednordman]

This is a tricky one. Competition in sport is obviously a pivitol element, politics or not. Teams should be allowed to play at thier own competence, but from experience, taking an absolute hammering isnt always productive (in many case the opposite) and in some cases can be offensive no matter how it is dished out. If i was that coach, after say, 50-0, i would have subbed the best players and given the inexperienced ones a try. If that is what he did, and the players didnt gloat, than he's been a little bit hard done by getting fired.

[Plagueround]

Any good communist would demand that they split the score to 50-50.

[rednordman]

mmm..mabey the othersides should unite and create a superteam to get revenge:D.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

As far as I can tell, the losing team were simply way out of their league. Unless the game was rigged or there was cheating going on, I don't understand why this is big enough of a deal to fire the coach of the winning team.

Seriously, if I were to enter the ring against a heavyweight boxing champion, I would get my ass handed to me. What right would I have to complain, or have his coach fired?

What's also mysterious is why they didn't forfeit or concede the game or whatever it is you do when you're getting your collective arses beaten so badly it's pointless to continue.

There's no shame in admitting defeat when you've been beaten fair and square.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Irrational christians....

[JimmyJazz]

I am in favor of all the horrible teams (who together constitute the amateurletariat) achieving collective consciousness and seizing the basketball courts.

But actually, Tom has hit on something here: capitalism treats real people's material well-being and the societal distribution of goods like a game. You only get one life, so if you're a loser, that's just too bad.

Maybe that's why religion has such appeal in particular to working/lower class people. It tells them that they'll get a chance to play again.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Do you think it's OK in a game like this for one side to humiliate the other side so completely? Or would Communists agree with the Christians that competition can go overboard?


It's just a sporting competition so I don't see a problem. As Communists we would naturally be against competition, but that's competition in economic, etc. Two different situations. Besides, sports and games wouldn't be any fun if there wasn't competition. :(

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

The point of the games is to win, yes?


I don't see why the Jesustards are getting so upset over this, unless the winning team were being douche bags about their massacre of the opposing team.

How could they not be? It was 100-Nothing.

Anyway, it has nothing to do with the fact that they're "jesustards."

Remember how CBS rolled over like a dead fish to fire Don Imus? Nobody has any guts anymore, once you're outed by the media it's over (until everyone finds someone else to be angry at).

[Robert]

there is a japanese custom that says when you play with someone weaker than you, you must let him gain a certain advance both to gain his respect and to have the hope to play with him again.

They taught different customs in the military.

Tom, the responses here to the infamous 100-0 story show how estranged today's communists are from ordinary people, rich, poor, christian and otherwise, in their values and outlook. Maybe it was ever thus.

Intelligent, passionate, and clueless. Poor darlins'.

[Demogorgon]

I don't know the details. It all depends on the conduct of the team, whether they played with sportsmanship for instance. With a score like that, you have to imagine they were just twisting the knife in after a while and that shouldn't be done at high school level.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Maybe it's a girl thing.

I was playing in a game a few years back and I distinctly remember winning 67-13, and me and the rest of the team just felt like shit.

[WhitemageofDOOM]

Maybe it's a girl thing.

I was playing in a game a few years back and I distinctly remember winning 67-13, and me and the rest of the team just felt like shit.

Being good at something makes you feel like shit?
Tcccch. That's fucked up.

The only people that should be shamed is the losers, for not conceding. And anyone who things the people who won should be shamed for being a whole lot better than there opponents. No one got hurt, no ones lives were on the line, just a friendly little game to see hows better at some silly little rules.

[ZeroNowhere]

Tom, the responses here to the infamous 100-0 story show how estranged today's communists are from ordinary people, rich, poor, christian and otherwise, in their values and outlook.
Yes, we're all a load of aliens. :rolleyes:

We came from Mars to steal your means of production! :O

[Schrödinger's Cat]

This has nothing to do with being a communist. We all have individual opinions on whether or not that's justified. Personally, I think the coach was a shithead for running up the score. Even in the pros you don't do that.

[Jazzratt]

If the game was won fairly the team and the coach deserve congratulation. Otherwise those who were caught cheating and any complicit in the cheating should be reprimanded and possibly suspended. Firing the coach is fucking stupid though.

Also, how the hell did this team get into a position where it was playing one that could thrash the shit out of them 100-0? And who the fuck are they, after getting in this position, to complain and demand an apology from the winning side?

[danyboy27]

Maybe it's a girl thing.

I was playing in a game a few years back and I distinctly remember winning 67-13, and me and the rest of the team just felt like shit.

i know what you mean, playing without any challenge do that.

its good to win when you have to fight for it, hell its even good to loose in those conditions.

[ls]

How could they not be? It was 100-Nothing.

Anyway, it has nothing to do with the fact that they're "jesustards."

Remember how CBS rolled over like a dead fish to fire Don Imus? Nobody has any guts anymore, once you're outed by the media it's over (until everyone finds someone else to be angry at).

Don Imus referred to "nappyheads".. that's why he was fired.

You're a dumb **** and should be banned immediately.

[Robert]

Let me try to help out those of you too lazy to read -- or too illiterate to understand -- the link.

The "Christians" won the game, though the girls from the other team are probably christian too.

Second, the story doesn't claim that the losers complained, though I suspect the losing players didn't relish being needlessly humiliated. The administrators of the winning school felt embarrassed and said so. The coach of the winning team was pressured to apologize. He refused, as was his right. He was fired, or "replaced" as we say so decorously, as was the school's right.

The reason he was fired will likely be entered on his record as "insubordination," not "winning the game."

There are many forms of stupidity. The "winning" coach illustrates one form.
The anti-christian bigots here illustrate another.

[BIG BROTHER]

the score should have been collectivized and given to each team according to their needs.

[Jazzratt]

The reason he was fired will likely be entered on his record as "insubordination," not "winning the game."

The school administrators illustrate stupidity a bit better, in my opinion. If they feel embarrassed when their school produces a team that delivers complete pummels then they should have asked the coach to teach his team to be a bunch of losers. And now they fired a coach who is clearly capable of shaping a formidable team. Morons.

[danyboy27]

i would have given to the loosing team an symbolic 1 point.

i think in that case that not an apoligize that was needed, but some kind of gesture of respect toward the loosing team.

some people where thinking that the coach needed to apoligize, personally i think a letter from the coach to the other coach would have done the job.

not an excuse letter, but more like something like: you did your best, you did what you could, i really think your team can play better, my team would be honored to play against yours next year, and i seriously expect a better fight etc etc.

at the end, its all about respect and honor.

[RGacky3]

There is no commie take on it, because its a sport, it has nothing to do with communism, thats like saying whats the commie take on cream cheese.

[casper]

^^i agree

personally, it was stupid of the school to fire him if they fired him simply because he severely out did the competition in a consensual game. if they fired him for insubordination, then well, i hate hierarchical rule, and he shouldn't have to apologies, if there was some type of unsportsmanlike or such, it would be good if he noticed and cared about it, however, simply scoring a high, high score against the opposition isn't necessarily a sign of disrespect.

[Rascolnikova]

As a communist, I have no take.

As a human being, I find it to have been an ungraceful course of action on both parts.

[Robert]

Both parts? You mean the firing of the coach, I take it?

Why should the school keep a coach they perceive to be at odds with their philosophy of sportsmanship?

[Dagoth Ur]

Its a matter of good sportsmanship and a genuine enjoyment of the game. It seems to me that if I got beat 100-0 I wouldn't blame the other team for kicking my ass, I would blame my ass for allowing itself to be kicked.

[Robert]

Damnation, will NO ONE read the infernal link? It wasn't the losers who were complaining.

[Rascolnikova]

Damnation, will NO ONE read the infernal link? It wasn't the losers who were complaining.

The link won't work for me--at the moment my internet sucks, and crashes when I try to get that to load. :(


Both the team/coach who did it, and if the loosing team had lodged a complaint. Firing. . . depends. Could go either way, depending on the people and attitudes involved. It might have been an over-reaction, might not--if the coach didn't understand why that was unacceptable, I could see it as justified.

[AtteroDominatus]

this is stupid.

he was fired and people were getting pissy because they won? they played fairly, from what it says. and it never says they were gloating or pushing it in the other members' faces. just because someone is very good at somethign doesn't mean they need to be insulted or told to stop. it's like punishing them for being good. it's not their fault they are better.

i say, kudos to the team for playing good. creds to the coach for being awesome. props to the players because they did wonderful. to the other team, practice more. and to the people who fired him and are getting upset, get over it: it's a competition for a reason.

[Robert]

Attero, not to be nosy, but have you ever played organized basketball? This is not like a pro baseball team losing 13-0, or even a football team losing 77-0. There had to be an overwhelming disparity in talent and physicality which you don't see in college and pro level sports. Actually, even the pros know not to do this for PR and goodwill reasons. The other team is having a bad day, so you get enough points to win, and then ease off on the gas pedal. It could be you next time.

Call it karma if it makes you feel less capitalistic.

[AtteroDominatus]

i have not, but does that change the fact which sport it is? does that change the fact it's a competition? if i was losing, a game for fun or not, i wouldn't want the other team to take it easy, even if they were losing. i have friends who play it, too. no oen expects others to let up. you win some, you lose some, you own, you get owned. it's part of the competition.

[Blackscare]

This whole discussion reminds me of Harrison Bergeron.

Seriously, what kind of control freaks would limit competition that doesn't relate to brutal capitalistic economic practices? I'm all for (libertarian) communism but the idea that whether something like this should be allowed is being discussed is just... creepy O_o

[Blackscare]

That being said, it was totally in poor taste to do that.

[Hiero]

The school administrators illustrate stupidity a bit better, in my opinion. If they feel embarrassed when their school produces a team that delivers complete pummels then they should have asked the coach to teach his team to be a bunch of losers. And now they fired a coach who is clearly capable of shaping a formidable team. Morons.

Why do you purposely take the most arrogant position all the time even when it is wrong?

The team that lost was out of their league, the wining team shouldn't feel that they one a victory. What I am guesing is that this losing teams wants to play basketball, but really sucks and there is no grade lower then the one they have been placed in. It is not a real victory, it is an administration fault. Basically it would be like Mike Tyson fighting a featherweight from a local division. Due to the extreme gap in divisions Mike Tyson and his fans would have nothing to gloat over when he won the fight.

Really the coach is a moron. The girls had nothing to gain nor to prove by reaching 100. Personally if I was the coach by half time I would have told them to cool it off and just have fun. There was no test of skill by reaching 100. The coach should feel embarrased that he is that petty to try and prove something against such an inferrer team. Sport includes wining, but real good sport something worth watching and playing is about extremes, two near skilled opponents battling it out for perfection.


There is no commie take on it, because its a sport, it has nothing to do with communism, thats like saying whats the commie take on cream cheese.

Yeah in this instanct it does, it comes down to personal opinion, how you were raised and I think what you look for in sport.

However sport in general, I think there is a Communist and Capitalist perspective on sport. Take for instance the Olmypics. Socialist countries always viewed the olmypics as a symbol for freindship between nations through competition. Due to the influence of the market we see competition is the main focus in capitalist countries. This is highly influenced by marketing and advertisements, to alot of cooperations the olmypics is about competiting for the next advertising contract.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Don Imus referred to "nappyheads".. that's why he was fired.

Oh, sorry, I wasn't aware you were for the firing of someone if they don't show the utmost in liberal PC. Whatever, that's your opinion.


You're a dumb **** and should be banned immediately.

You should taken out, castrated, and then have your stomach removed and cooked in front of you.

Following that, chopped into tiny bits so nobody has to stare at the ugliness resonating from your being and, afterwards, the remnants should be fed to poor, homeless dogs.

[Plagueround]

Oh, sorry, I wasn't aware you were for the firing of someone if they don't show the utmost in liberal PC. Whatever, that's your opinion.

One of my favorite posters once said this on the matter of showing contempt toward people being "PC":


If you have a problem with being tactful and non-discriminatory to other humyn beings, then the problem is you.

Then again, looking at this thread...it would appear some non-OIers could use that advice as well.

I think I'll edit and elaborate on that point...Having attended Catholic schools, as well as having a sister who currently attends one...to simply dismiss any of those girls as "Jesustards" and the like is quite stupid. Hell, most of the Catholic schoolkids I ever knew were forced to go, or just stuck around because they had developed a solid group of friends over the years...I'll never quite understand many leftist's tendency to be outright vile to anyone who has some sort of faith (and I say this as a rather adamant atheist).

And not to sound lecherous, but it's also been my experience that former Catholics and Mormons are usually freaky, freaky people in the uh...bedroom. Best not to alienate them.

Perhaps that's too much information.

[Rascolnikova]

i say, kudos to the team for playing good.


In the situation described, no one was playing at all. One team was running drills while trying not to trip over the other. It's like being proud that you beat your ten year old sister at chess while you she was just learning to play; it's unsporting, shallow, stupid, and unkind--as well as useless.

[casper]

And not to sound lecherous, but it's also been my experience that former Catholics and Mormons are usually freaky, freaky people in the uh...bedroom. Best not to alienate them.

before i becamed too old to be in boyscouts, a fellow scout that went to a catholic school had some interesting stories...

i think the general level of restriction and the temptation of the forbidden is always...motivating for most young girls.

also, i'm pretty sure catholic schools have a fair share of atheists.

[Conquer or Die]

Running up the score shows a lack of humility and integrity. The attitude that someone should be beaten when knocked down and that this is a sign of strength is a hilarious and parasitic attitude. The losing side had a grand total of 20 female students (allegedly with learning disabilities) in the entire school versus a large private christian school (i'd imagine that this is Texas' equivalent of the rich catholic schools that pepper America's landscape that recruit top tier players.)

Nope, it still remains a universal moral that beating someone when they're down or weak is pathetic masturbation. So many people are afraid of being called "PC" and therefore "not being cool" these days that they need to distort reality with acceptance. What the fuck are these attitudes doing on Revleft?

[Orange Juche]

As communists, we oppose any serious or excessive competition anyways.

I don't see anything oxymoronical about being a communist, and liking competition (even to the degree which you could call "excessive"). If the competition is in something willfully participated in, whose purpose is a form of entertainment, then competition (I think) is great.

Its figuring out where competition belongs. If a system of competition is essentially forced upon you, and dictates whether or not you can feed your family (or how much you can even feed them), then of course it is a problem. Its just that competition needs to be kept to leisure activities, not to critical matters of life.

[StalinFanboy]

One of my favorite posters once said this on the matter of showing contempt toward people being "PC":



Then again, looking at this thread...it would appear some non-OIers could use that advice as well.

I think I'll edit and elaborate on that point...Having attended Catholic schools, as well as having a sister who currently attends one...to simply dismiss any of those girls as "Jesustards" and the like is quite stupid. Hell, most of the Catholic schoolkids I ever knew were forced to go, or just stuck around because they had developed a solid group of friends over the years...I'll never quite understand many leftist's tendency to be outright vile to anyone who has some sort of faith (and I say this as a rather adamant atheist).

And not to sound lecherous, but it's also been my experience that former Catholics and Mormons are usually freaky, freaky people in the uh...bedroom. Best not to alienate them.

Perhaps that's too much information.
For the records, I was referring to the school administration as "Jesustards."

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

One of my favorite posters once said this on the matter of showing contempt toward people being "PC":

Well, I didn't mean to say that what he said was good or anything but tasteless.

I'm just saying that you have the power to change the channel and not listen to someone if you don't agree with it. And of course, if you feel the need to voice a complaint go right ahead.

For example, say the local branch of the socialist party buys a radio channel (something that's really hard to do but work with me here) and decides to air the message about how managers suck and corporations should be taken over and the goal is revolution and all that....well, I would have no problem with that station. If I don't find it entertaining, I'll change the channel.

[Rascolnikova]

Well, I didn't mean to say that what he said was good or anything but tasteless.

I'm just saying that you have the power to change the channel and not listen to someone if you don't agree with it. And of course, if you feel the need to voice a complaint go right ahead.

For example, say the local branch of the socialist party buys a radio channel (something that's really hard to do but work with me here) and decides to air the message about how managers suck and corporations should be taken over and the goal is revolution and all that....well, I would have no problem with that station. If I don't find it entertaining, I'll change the channel.

Perhaps there would be some merit to this argument if the public owned the media, or if, at least, the media were run in the public's interest. Unfortunately, our instruments of public discourse serve profit--and serve the people only as far as the people can be made instruments of profit.

Ignoring the basic injustice of market dynamics as a criteria for production and distribution*, there is a literal and direct censorship that takes place in support of consumerism. Public interest groups attempting to buy adverts for causes like "buy nothing day" find themselves unable to purchase air time at the going rate, because their public interest message runs counter to the profit motive of the other advertisers.

Furthermore, when you say that its "difficult" for a local socialist group to buy a local radio station, you ignore the intention behind that difficulty. In exactly the same way it has been "difficult" for native americans to hang on to or re-acquire their land. While I can only expect you to make the standard capitalist argument that profit motive is necessary, I do hope you will not be naive enough to insist it is benign when it so clearly instigates foundational instances of outright theft such as these.




*for example, television shows like "Dr. Quinn, medicine woman" can have an enormous popularity, but if the demographic they appeal to is poor--in this case because it consisted largely of the elderly--they will be discontinued.

[ls]

Oh, sorry, I wasn't aware you were for the firing of someone if they don't show the utmost in liberal PC. Whatever, that's your opinion.

Everyone appears to be on your side, now that's fucking funny. Also funny is the context in which he meant it, it's not like I've got anything wrong with calling anyone anything given the right context.


You should taken out, castrated, and then have your stomach removed and cooked in front of you.

Following that, chopped into tiny bits so nobody has to stare at the ugliness resonating from your being and, afterwards, the remnants should be fed to poor, homeless dogs.


You should +be taken out

The fact you think this is equivalent to being banned/dumb is another funny thing.

[AtteroDominatus]

In the situation described, no one was playing at all. One team was running drills while trying not to trip over the other. It's like being proud that you beat your ten year old sister at chess while you she was just learning to play; it's unsporting, shallow, stupid, and unkind--as well as useless.
weren't they on the same grounds? they were both the same age and both practiced with the same base abilities right? one just practices and became better than the other.

[Blackscare]

The team that lost was also from a very tiny school with only 20 students!. AND its a school for kids with learning disabilities (not sure what that exactly means, but it may extend to people have physical problems or mental deficiencies that could effect reflexes, etc). It's not as if they both had an equal footing in the first place. Not saying there shouldn't be competition in general, but the parents who were cheering for 100 points and the coach should feel ashamed. It's just in poor taste to humiliate the other team when there's obviously a huge disparity in ability.

I go to a tiny school as well, not that size but it still limits the number of athletes we have, our teams usually suck (except at soccer) compared to the teams farther up island, but they don't twist the knife when they beat us (they easily could if they wanted to). The coach is a dick. This clearly wasn't a fair game.

[AtteroDominatus]

oh! i thought they meant the winning team was the one with learning disabilities. (and i think they mean being mentally retarded or extreme cases of HDHD, or the like). so nevermind, if that was the case it was a jerk thing to do =/ and was completely uncalled for. if they would have been a team on equal footing i wouldn't have really minded, but if this is the case, it's just sick, as said.

[Rascolnikova]

Learning disabilities don't have much to do with athletic ability--though the size of the school does--but I really think that's all beside the point. When I was 9, there were people two and five times my age who I could trash at chess (mostly people who had never really played). . . but it was still pointless and juvenile to do so. In a game, any kind of game, that isn't even close, you're no longer engaging in competition; since you (the more advanced) aren't going to learn anything, it's best to turn it into a teaching experience. People don't learn much from simply being crushed--mostly just that other people are jerks.

[Enragé]

the losing team simply shouldnt play in the same league or whatever as the winning team, simple. It's fucked up for 'em, but well, tough. As long as the winning team werent being douchebags, its fine.

Btw, what stance you take on this has nothing to do with being communist, anarchist, or whatever