What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Little League strategy? Game throwing. (1 Viewer)

SHIZNITTTT

Footballguy
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/08/18/432721453/accusations-of-game-throwing-rile-little-league-softball-world-series?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150818

A scandal rocked the Little League Softball World Series in Portland, Ore., this week when a team from Snohomish, Wash., allegedly threw a game to prevent an Iowa team from advancing to the semifinals.

The Central Iowa All-Stars won their most recent game against Canada 7-0 and finished pool play with a 3-1 record. To advance to the semifinals, however, they needed the Snohomish team, US West, to win or score at least three runs against a team that Central Iowa had already defeated.

It's important to note that West had already secured a berth in the semis. During pool play, it rolled past two opponents but barely beat Central Iowa. So the team was accused of intentionally losing its game against the US Southeast team to ensure that Southeast advanced — and not Central Iowa.

To avoid that rematch, West allegedly benched its starters, swung at pitches in the dirt and bunted on two-strike counts, resulting in an 8-0 loss. The team did not record a single hit.

Iowa coach Charlie Husak told WHO-TV that he thought West's intentions were clear from the start.

" 'It was very evident when they did the starting lineups, their four best players were on the bench,' Husak said in a phone interview. 'Their top four hitters were their subs the previous night when we played them. It was very evident right away what was going on.' ...

"It took about a half inning for the girls to catch on," Husak said. 'We were trying to keep it from them, but you could see when they caught on that the tears started to pile up. It was pretty emotional.' "
The Des Moines Register quotes the president of Central Iowa Little League, Chris Chadd, as saying, "It's not the girls' fault. It's the coaches'... they should be disqualified."

Iowa filed a protest. The Register reports that Little League International officials issued this statement early Tuesday:

"The Little League International Tournament Committee recently received credible reports that some teams did not play with the effort and spirit appropriate for any Little League game."
Officials ruled that there would be a one-game playoff between West and Central Iowa on Tuesday to determine which team would advance to the semis.

"The girls are pretty pumped right now [to play against the West team]," Husak told WHO-TV. "We're ready to play; it's going to be an early morning game. We have to play at 9 a.m. PT, but the girls have a little bit of a chip on their shoulders. They are going to fight for everything they have."

Update 2:45 p.m. ET: Central Iowa Wins

Central Iowa defeated US West 3-2 to advance to the semifinals of the Little League Softball World Series. The Des Moines Register provided the following recap:

"Iowa erased a one-run deficit by scoring two runs in the top of the third inning on an RBI double and a Washington error to take its deciding advantage. Iowa pitcher Mikayla Houge recorded six strikeouts over the final three innings and 11 on the morning to help seal the victory.

"Washington stranded a pair of runners in both the third and fourth innings, but did not have a hitter reach base in the final two frames."
Iowa's semifinal game is scheduled for 4 p.m. PT Tuesday against the East qualifier from Rhode Island. You can watch the game on ESPN2.

 
It would not have been so bad if they played some of their subs, but actually tried their best to win the game. But to out and out throw the game was pathetic. It is good they were so obvious that they got caught. I am glad of the outcome, but I am sure the only result will be the next coach will be a bit less obvious when they throw a game.

 
How to they just get to change the tournament rules on the fly?
Integrity of the game.
And in this case, Snohomish got what they deserved. I can only imagine the joy that Central Iowa felt eliminating them.
The proper time to change rules is before or after a competition takes place, not during.

And as for the integrity of the game argument, are you claiming that the West team was enacting a strategy they believed would give them a lower chance to win the tournament?

 
How to they just get to change the tournament rules on the fly?
Integrity of the game.
And in this case, Snohomish got what they deserved. I can only imagine the joy that Central Iowa felt eliminating them.
The proper time to change rules is before or after a competition takes place, not during.

And as for the integrity of the game argument, are you claiming that the West team was enacting a strategy they believed would give them a lower chance to win the tournament?
There is probably a clause that gives the organizers fairly broad discretion in order to preserve sportsmanship and the integrity of the game.

 
I don't have any issue with the rule change. What the team did was in bad taste. You can't feel good about winning your region, and more, if you aren't willing to face the best teams.

With that said - The West coach is also an idiot for not thinking people would be upset by this. There are much easier ways to lose a game on purpose and not get caught red handed. Tell your pitcher to take a little off of every other pitch...tell your fielders to flub a ball or miss a throw here and there. Don't do overly visible stuff like bench your best players and have everyone play crappy all the time. Come on.

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.
Except it did matter - by tanking, the Central Iowa team would've been eliminated from the tournament and Washington wouldn't have had to face them again. (They won 4-3 in their meeting.)

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.
Except it did matter - by tanking, the Central Iowa team would've been eliminated from the tournament and Washington wouldn't have had to face them again. (They won 4-3 in their meeting.)
I didnt say tank. I said, as a coach, I would start all my bench players if I dont need a win. I dont support flat out tanking, but I do support playing kids as much as you can.

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.
Except it did matter - by tanking, the Central Iowa team would've been eliminated from the tournament and Washington wouldn't have had to face them again. (They won 4-3 in their meeting.)
I didnt say tank. I said, as a coach, I would start all my bench players if I dont need a win. I dont support flat out tanking, but I do support playing kids as much as you can.
It would seem the rules incentivised tanking in this instance, and then the powers that be decided to change the structure of the tournament after the fact.

 
These are the **ck tard coaches who ruin youth sports.

My kid would be on a plane back home if his coaches ever pulled these types of shenanigans.

Insane.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
These are the **ck tard coaches who ruin youth sports.

My kid would be on a plane back home if his coaches ever pulled these types of shenanigans.

Insane.
Mine too...because they lost and are done for the season.
But you're the guy who condoned winning at all costs no matter the age in the thread you started awhile ago. So we know how you feel about it.

 
These are the **ck tard coaches who ruin youth sports.

My kid would be on a plane back home if his coaches ever pulled these types of shenanigans.

Insane.
Mine too...because they lost and are done for the season.
But you're the guy who condoned winning at all costs no matter the age in the thread you started awhile ago. So we know how you feel about it.
Yep, at all costs. :rolleyes:

 
I don't understand asking your reserves not to play hard. I look at this as asking my players in basketball who are up by 30, "don't score any more points!" Not going to happen. You play as hard as you can with the players in the game.

This coach that "tanked" the game is going to be known as a turd forever in his hometown.

"Look Mildred there goes that turdeater that had those girls throw that game in little league!"

I have seen coaches have the players not play as hard as they should when it doesn't matter the outcome, but never asking the kids to make a mockery of the game.

 
These are the **ck tard coaches who ruin youth sports.

My kid would be on a plane back home if his coaches ever pulled these types of shenanigans.

Insane.
Mine too...because they lost and are done for the season.
But you're the guy who condoned winning at all costs no matter the age in the thread you started awhile ago. So we know how you feel about it.
Yep, at all costs. :rolleyes:
:lmao:

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.
Except it did matter - by tanking, the Central Iowa team would've been eliminated from the tournament and Washington wouldn't have had to face them again. (They won 4-3 in their meeting.)
I didnt say tank. I said, as a coach, I would start all my bench players if I dont need a win. I dont support flat out tanking, but I do support playing kids as much as you can.
It would seem the rules incentivised tanking in this instance, and then the powers that be decided to change the structure of the tournament after the fact.
I applaud the tournament committee for doing what they did on the fly. The only time to have corrected it and addressed it properly was when they did. Would you have preferred the results stood and addressed it after the fact? Maybe you do, but I call BS on that tact.

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.
Except it did matter - by tanking, the Central Iowa team would've been eliminated from the tournament and Washington wouldn't have had to face them again. (They won 4-3 in their meeting.)
I didnt say tank. I said, as a coach, I would start all my bench players if I dont need a win. I dont support flat out tanking, but I do support playing kids as much as you can.
:rolleyes: Yeah, because being in a situation where losing by more than 3 runs to eliminate a rival is the perfect reason to *cough cough * "rest" * cough cough * your starters.

 
FWIW, I have zero problem sitting the best players when a win doesnt matter for your team. Its hard getting the 10-12 guys into your lineup at this level so if you have a chance to let them play the entire game, you do it. That being said, I didnt see the game so I'll have to assume they did more (or less) than just sit their best players.
Except it did matter - by tanking, the Central Iowa team would've been eliminated from the tournament and Washington wouldn't have had to face them again. (They won 4-3 in their meeting.)
I didnt say tank. I said, as a coach, I would start all my bench players if I dont need a win. I dont support flat out tanking, but I do support playing kids as much as you can.
:rolleyes: Yeah, because being in a situation where losing by more than 3 runs to eliminate a rival is the perfect reason to *cough cough * "rest" * cough cough * your starters.
I get what you're saying. I'm just saying that any decent coach would have started all their bench players if a win doesn't matter to them. If you don't play them then, they never play. In any case, I've already agreed that this team obviously did more than that, so I'm not agreeing with their actions.
 
With that said - The West coach is also an idiot for not thinking people would be upset by this. There are much easier ways to lose a game on purpose and not get caught red handed. Tell your pitcher to take a little off of every other pitch...tell your fielders to flub a ball or miss a throw here and there. Don't do overly visible stuff like bench your best players and have everyone play crappy all the time. Come on.
I disagree. The Coach should give some other players a chance to play, that's great. Perhaps he doesn't give the steal sign or hit and run all game. Great.

But NO WAY do you teach these kids to not play their hardest and best. Whoever is in the game gives it their all, has fun, and let the chips fall where they may.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is why pool play sucks
They used to use pool play in the big HS hockey postseason tournament in Massachusetts, and it frequently was a nightmare.

There was one year when the debate was over the word "eliminate" from a tiebreaker -- the committee chose to "eliminate" the best of the three teams and advance them to the semifinals, making the tiebreaker between the other two teams for the last spot.

Another time, a team couldn't score more than three goals, because it would lose a tiebreaker after bouncing another team.

Not a bad system for just seeding if every team advances to single-elimination, but not as a means of ending a team's tournament/season.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top