In the name of 'social justice' this is just wrong

[Balta1701]

Not all skill levels are the same -- understand that first and foremost. You will never have "one" league where everyone fits, this goes for school, jobs, etc...some people are just better. That doesn't mean you can't learn the values of winning and losing and trying harder after failure regardless of this natural inequality of the evil evil world.

 

The lesson of winning and losing and getting up after you've fallen remains intact, regardless.

Except for that other league, who you don't have to worry about losing to, since you've been bailed out by the government rules.

[NorthSideSox72]

And now let's imagine there's 6 teams. So, you try to come up with different levels, and you figure out rapidly that you can't...you wind up with ridiculous splits like 2 teams in 1 league who always play each other and 4 in another.

 

No matter how you want to look at it, you've let your major, overarching principle of "teaching them a lesson" go, and so I can keep coming up with scenarios that will make the rules you require more and more complex/unworkable.

Which is a damn good argument for this and similar rules being downright silly. Max runs per inning, to make the game move along and let players get their at-bats, fine. But any of this other stuff to take away the winning/losing aspect is not only a bad idea for the reasons Y2HH and I have stated, its also just not realistic.

 

Let them play, let some games get out of hand, and rely on coaches and parents to teach their kids that everyone wins and loses at times, and how to move on from that. Win with class, lose with class.

 

[Iwritecode]

So, then my question in reply would be...if you're in charge of a league where one or two teams have been running rampant and blowing everyone out and running up the score, to the point that half the players on your team don't want to even show up because it's no fun to face off against the team that has Bryce Harper at catcher, what do you do?

 

Do you sit by and let half the league's players quit because no one wants to put up with that any more and no one is having any fun, or do you try to come up with a rule that makes things more workable?

 

 

When I played there was always one or two teams that nobody liked to play against because they were really good. The thing is those teams didn't always win every game. Those few times we did win against them they were hard-fought and well-deserved.

 

I see the same thing happening when my daughter plays.

[southsider2k5]

So, then my question in reply would be...if you're in charge of a league where one or two teams have been running rampant and blowing everyone out and running up the score, to the point that half the players on your team don't want to even show up because it's no fun to face off against the team that has Bryce Harper at catcher, what do you do?

 

Do you sit by and let half the league's players quit because no one wants to put up with that any more and no one is having any fun, or do you try to come up with a rule that makes things more workable?

 

Yes, reinforce the lessons that you shouldn't work as hard as you can, and that someone else will just give it to you. Quit, because you get more out of it than hard work.

[Iwritecode]

Yes, reinforce the lessons that you shouldn't work as hard as you can, and that someone else will just give it to you. Quit, because you get more out of it than hard work.

 

Just imagine if we did this in school.

 

"Well little Johhny, you actually failed this class but since everyone else passed it's not fair for you to fail so I'll pass you too."

[Y2HH]

Just imagine if we did this in school.

 

"Well little Johhny, you actually failed this class but since everyone else passed it's not fair for you to fail so I'll pass you too."

 

I think we do. Which is why American children are getting dumber and dumber.

 

While the movie Idiocracy is off the charts, it's becoming more and more evident that that's the way this country is headed.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Y2HH

[Controlled Chaos]

And some kids were better because they worked hard at it. I would practice with the team for an hour and then with my dad for another 2. I wanted to be the best out there and busted my ass to do so. Other kids didn't want to play or didn't have the passion I had. What's next, banning extra practice, to keep everyone on the same playing field?

 

When kids are old enough to know the game then they're old enough to know winning and losing. Hell my daughter turns 4 Saturday and she has known winning and losing for a year. I don't know why one day out of the blue she said "lets race daddy", but I let her win and she was all excited that she "won" I never even taught her what "winning" was, but there she was throwing her hands in the air jumping up and down. You can bet your ass the next race, I taught her what losing was. Now I beat her about 1/2 the time. The first couple times she cried and threw a tantrum and I had to do some 'GASP' parenting. Now when she loses she says good race daddy. Kids are exposed to winning and losing with tag, musical chairs, red light green light etc.... They know winning and losing at 4 years old. Competition is a part of life...better that they learn to deal with it.

[Balta1701]

So, you say there's value in sometimes letting your daughter win even though you could beat her every time?

 

Hmmm...very interesting....

[Jenksismyhero]

So, you say there's value in sometimes letting your daughter win even though you could beat her every time?

 

Hmmm...very interesting....

 

why are you making such silly arguments? No one is saying that every kid should lose 100% of the time and be happy with it. We're saying that kids should learn the value of being a good loser and that losing often times creates changes in preparation/action that are beneficial in all aspects of life. There's never going to be a situation where one kid goes his entire childhood without winning because the system prevents him from doing so.

 

And I find it pretty hilarious that the resident extreme liberal/progressive on the board sees ZERO positives in a society (or sport) in which no one is just GIVEN something, but they're forced to EARN it. "It's not FAIR that they win all the time! Let's change the rules so that those people that lack the work ethic to succeed are made equal! Everyone DESERVES a win"

Edited June 2, 2010 by Jenksismybitch

[southsider2k5]

Just imagine if we did this in school.

 

"Well little Johhny, you actually failed this class but since everyone else passed it's not fair for you to fail so I'll pass you too."

 

Its called social promotion and it happens all of the time.

[Balta1701]

why are you making such silly arguments? No one is saying that every kid should lose 100% of the time and be happy with it. We're saying that kids should learn the value of being a good loser and that losing often times creates changes in preparation/action that are beneficial in all aspects of life. There's never going to be a situation where one kid goes his entire childhood without winning because the system prevents him from doing so.

 

And I find it pretty hilarious that the resident extreme liberal/progressive on the board sees ZERO positives in a society (or sport) in which no one is just GIVEN something, but they're forced to EARN it. "It's not FAIR that they win all the time! Let's change the rules so that those people that lack the work ethic to succeed are made equal!"

First of all...

 

I don't believe what I'm going to write but it's time for someone to play Devil's advocate here.

 

Second of all...you're ignoring my main point here, and perhaps you're doing so correctly because I think I've gotten sidetracked...is there no good to come from learning the values of sportsmanship as well?

 

This rule clearly is a poor way of enforcing it, but the talk here has been all about the benefits of teaching kids about winning and losing and how they should be ready to be competitive in everything and always try to be winners, but at least to me, the idea of having a good time doing something, or making sure everyone at least enjoys themselves, seems like its being lost here. That's the point I'm trying to make.

[southsideirish71]

In the end its natural ability plus preparation plus effort/will that will separate one from the other through life. This applies to sports as well as education as well as life in general. Competition is a natural part of life. Failure is also part of how we advance and learn. Its how we adapt or don't adapt when we experience personal failure that determines how far we go. Parents always try to shield their children from pain. But at times you have to sit and watch it, uncomfortably and use your experience and compassion to help teach a lesson in life to a child. Everyone is not super at everything, no matter how we all want it to be. Celebrate their successes, help them get through their defeats, and in the end help them to strive to get better at everything they do. You can't stop every fall or hurt that your child will go through. You just need to help them understand that this is part of life, and if anything it may motivate them to practice more, study more, and get better through hard work and the will to get better. Competition in the end can bring the best out of you.

[Jenksismyhero]

First of all...

 

 

 

Second of all...you're ignoring my main point here, and perhaps you're doing so correctly because I think I've gotten sidetracked...is there no good to come from learning the values of sportsmanship as well?

 

Oh sure, I don't think anyone is arguing that. There's as much to be learned from being a good winner as there is from being a good loser. People are arguing that a rule that actually makes you a loser for being too good, or which grants achievements that aren't deserving, is wrong.

 

[Balta1701]

People are arguing that a rule that actually makes you a loser for being too good

At least to my eyes, if you're running up the score every game, you are something of a loser, just a different kind.

[Jenksismyhero]

This rule clearly is a poor way of enforcing it, but the talk here has been all about the benefits of teaching kids about winning and losing and how they should be ready to be competitive in everything and always try to be winners, but at least to me, the idea of having a good time doing something, or making sure everyone at least enjoys themselves, seems like its being lost here. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

I get the point, but at the level where kids are going to know the difference between just having fun playing a game and actually competing, giving everyone a fair shot or making sure everyone enjoys themselves is not part of the equation. In other words, that's a fine goal for pre-teen sports where the goal is to learn the game. After that it's about competing and becoming the best you can be.

 

And I'd still argue that such an outlook (whether you advocate this position or not) defines the different philosophies between a lot of our politics today. Some people (liberals) feel bad for those kids (people) that still can't shoot the basketball (get a job) because they didn't practice (work hard at school) but now want to still get equal playing time/wins ($$), all at the expense of those that DID put in the time and effort.

[Balta1701]

And if I wanted to return the caricature, I could say that the win-at-all-costs, no concern for anyone else, no concern for the rules or who gets hurt in the process, if you lose you deserve it and we winners just get to laugh at you is an equally unfair portrait of your side.

[Jenksismyhero]

And if I wanted to return the caricature, I could say that the win-at-all-costs, no concern for anyone else, no concern for the rules or who gets hurt in the process, if you lose you deserve it and we winners just get to laugh at you is an equally unfair portrait of your side.

 

yeah but your side is winning

[Balta1701]

yeah but your side is winning

Which is a little ironic, don't ya think?

[Iwritecode]

I think we do. Which is why American children are getting dumber and dumber.

 

While the movie Idiocracy is off the charts, it's becoming more and more evident that that's the way this country is headed.

 

 

Its called social promotion and it happens all of the time.

 

I actually thought about that after I posted it. I hear all the time about high school grads that can barely even read. I've never actually had any first-hand experience with it.

 

I only failed one class in high school but I didn't really need it to graduate. I saw nearly half my classmates get held-back in second grade. Another friend of mine had to take Government twice in order to graduate. We were never given anything.

[kjshoe04]

I was on a travelling baseball team that went 0-35 one season. We were the biggest losers in the area and we still managed to have fun. We were close in maybe 3 of those games too. Nothing felt better than getting a win the next season.

[southsider2k5]

I actually thought about that after I posted it. I hear all the time about high school grads that can barely even read. I've never actually had any first-hand experience with it.

 

I only failed one class in high school but I didn't really need it to graduate. I saw nearly half my classmates get held-back in second grade. Another friend of mine had to take Government twice in order to graduate. We were never given anything.

 

It is much more prevalent in crappy school districts. The school system I am in actually socially promotes until 9th grade unless the parents stop it. It is also a lot more popular now as more emphasis is put on numbers than education.

[Iwritecode]

First of all...

 

 

 

Second of all...you're ignoring my main point here, and perhaps you're doing so correctly because I think I've gotten sidetracked...is there no good to come from learning the values of sportsmanship as well?

 

This rule clearly is a poor way of enforcing it, but the talk here has been all about the benefits of teaching kids about winning and losing and how they should be ready to be competitive in everything and always try to be winners, but at least to me, the idea of having a good time doing something, or making sure everyone at least enjoys themselves, seems like its being lost here. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

Teaching kids about winning and losing and how to have fun while doing either one is on the parents and coaches IMO.

 

There are some bad coaches out there that only care about winning and take the fun out of the game.

[Balta1701]

There are some bad coaches out there that only care about winning and take the fun out of the game.

And when it comes right down to it, if a team is running up the score every game, isn't that pretty much exactly where the idea of creating a rule to stop that comes from?

[Iwritecode]

And when it comes right down to it, if a team is running up the score every game, isn't that pretty much exactly where the idea of creating a rule to stop that comes from?

 

Depends on the rule I guess. The rule in the OP actually punishes teams for being too good.

 

Also there are some teams that can't really help it.

 

There were two teams that my daughter played against last year that were pretty good.

 

One was good because they always took extra bases even though most of the kids couldn't even throw the ball all the way across the diamond and they always put their best players at certain positions the whole game. We actually beat them once and they were PISSED.

 

The other team was just good. They didn't take extra bases, they rotated the players positions around the field, they had fun and they still won.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Iwritecode

[southsider2k5]

First of all...

 

 

 

Second of all...you're ignoring my main point here, and perhaps you're doing so correctly because I think I've gotten sidetracked...is there no good to come from learning the values of sportsmanship as well?

 

This rule clearly is a poor way of enforcing it, but the talk here has been all about the benefits of teaching kids about winning and losing and how they should be ready to be competitive in everything and always try to be winners, but at least to me, the idea of having a good time doing something, or making sure everyone at least enjoys themselves, seems like its being lost here. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

Does it make you feel better about yourself in a competitive area if the other team either half-asses it, or if they beat you by too much, and you got given the win? How good is it for a kids self-esteem to go home knowing that the only reason you won is either because the other team felt sorry for you, or because your team was so bad, the adults felt sorry for you and gave you the win anyway. That isn't good sportsmanship at all.