100 - 0 win. Winners apologize?

[bluestarultor]

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=903780

In the absence of a news thread, and the larger repercussions to our society, I'm posting this here.

To sum it up, one girls' basketball team beat another in a 100-to-nothing shutout. The school has gone on record apologizing for the victory.

The worst part? They won fair and square.

I personally think this is stupid. The idea that you'd actually need to apologize for being good at something worries me. Like Harrison Bergeron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron). If there had been cheating involved, I could see it. However, the defeated school, according to the article, hasn't had a single win in the past several years, and no cheating was involved. I think that their energy would be better spent in, I dunno, improving the team or getting a better coach or something, but they're just basking in the glow of the media attention. They were so bad that they got NBA tickets to cheer them up, for crying out loud. And the winning coach finally told his team to slow down when it was clear they were going to wipe the floor with them. I can see how one team severely outclassed the other, but I think that that should tell the losing school a bit about their program.


Anyone else have thoughts on this?

[Marelo]

I saw the Harrison Bergeron reference before it was even made. I appear to have developed precognitive powers.

No, but seriously; I wouldn't say they need to apologize. I think they did it just out of pity. In other words, I don't think they were apologizing because they were so good; I think they were apologizing because the other team was so bad, as odd as that sounds.

[phil_]

My Japanese an-ee-mays tell me that fighting with less than your all is an insult to your opponent. Mayhaps a twenty-student school shouldn't have their own team. Or, I dunno, improve so that they can get a single win in four years.

[Bells]

"Sorry you suck so much"?

Sounds more like Rubbing it in then actually apologizing

[batgirl]

I know that when I played in high school, we were told that if we were either winning or losing by more than 24 or so points, we or the other team would loosen up a bit. It's not that they were apologizing that the other team was bad, but at 60-0, for the sake of the players and the parents, slowing down would be nice. According to my newspaper, the winning team was still playing full court press AND shooting 3 pointers. There's like an unwritten (and in some leagues actual written) law that says to kind of slow up if you're winning by a lot. I know that when I played softball, we were also told that if we scored 14 runs, the game would end automatically as to not embarrass the other team.

It's silly, but think of how the other team must have felt, not being able to score a point and still getting just beaten and beaten. It certainly didn't help their morale.

Now, I for one think this rule is silly, because if you stink you stink and there shouldn't be sugar coating over that. Sports in general have gotten so soft over the years because of whining by parents and administrators alike (i.e getting rid of dodge ball and tag). However, if you see that another team is losing by oh, 80 points, it's fair to say that you should let up and just let the embarrassment end there.

[Mesden]

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=903780

In the absence of a news thread, and the larger repercussions to our society, I'm posting this here.

To sum it up, one girls' basketball team beat another in a 100-to-nothing shutout. The school has gone on record apologizing for the victory.

The worst part? They won fair and square.

I personally think this is stupid. The idea that you'd actually need to apologize for being good at something worries me. Like Harrison Bergeron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron). If there had been cheating involved, I could see it. However, the defeated school, according to the article, hasn't had a single win in the past several years, and no cheating was involved. I think that their energy would be better spent in, I dunno, improving the team or getting a better coach or something, but they're just basking in the glow of the media attention. They were so bad that they got NBA tickets to cheer them up, for crying out loud. And the winning coach finally told his team to slow down when it was clear they were going to wipe the floor with them. I can see how one team severely outclassed the other, but I think that that should tell the losing school a bit about their program.


Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Why yes hitting someone when they're down is perfectly acceptable etiquette and a fine show of sportsmanship.

Edit: I mean seriously Harrison Bergeron? Could you possibly go down a bigger slippery slope?

[bluestarultor]

Why yes hitting someone when they're down is perfectly acceptable etiquette and a fine show of sportsmanship.

There's a difference between down and buried. I think the fact that the losing team hasn't won a single game in years indicates they're the latter. In this case, extensive remedial action is necessary on the part of the losing team to prevent this kind of embarrassment from happening in the first place. I chalk it up less to the winning team being at fault for winning and more to the losing team being at fault for knowing they have severe issues and not seeking to fix them.


@ Edit: I'm not one of the mind to praise someone as a special snowflake for breathing. Our society focuses on results. In the case of an inability to provide them, the real world is highly unsympathetic. The idea that these girls are being rewarded outright for extremely poor performance is in direct conflict with that ideology. I used Harrison Bergeron as an example of the extreme case, not a direct result. However, other examples are readily available, such as the Special Olympics, in which all parties are rewarded regardless of performance, or the practice of Communism, which we know falls apart because of a lack of drive to perform well when no incentive is offered.

[Marelo]

Why yes hitting someone when they're down is perfectly acceptable etiquette and a fine show of sportsmanship.

Edit: I mean seriously Harrison Bergeron? Could you possibly go down a bigger slippery slope?

"If we start letting up on teams that are doing poorly, we'll end up removing contact sports altogether, and then we'll ban speaking in any negative manner, and then we'll change all of the activities to noncompetitive arts and crafts, all in the name of saving the egos of the losers."

That a big enough slope for you?

On topic: I don't mean an apology in the sarcastic sense... I mean, they aren't necessarily apologizing for being good. They might be apologizing that the situation of their really good team against the really poor team even came about. See what I mean?

[Preturbed]

Those girls are definitely playing in the wrong league, no two ways about it. If the fact that it's a school for "special" people doesn't tip you off, maybe loss after loss will. Oh wait, obviously not. The people really at fault here are the coaches, the winning coach for not seeking a forfeit from the opposing team at halftime, and the losing coach for not doing his damn job!

This is like the beginning of the Mighty Ducks, only I doubt there will ever be a turnaround for this team. Only a long line of sadistic coaches watching them lose.

[Archbio]

I can't find the reference right now, but I remember reading that Kurt Vonnegut himself was of the opinion that many people were going beyond the intent of Harrison Bergeron when interpreting it and were abusively applying it to real world situations.

Authorial intent is something of a problematic factor when interpreting a work, but I think this is one such situation, without a doubt. Were the winning players hobbled? Were they punished? Was the game and its result cancelled or altered in any way?

They just apologized. There's nothing wrong with what's basically a display of sportsmanship, even if it is ackward, and Harrison Bergeron is in no way relevant to it.

Edit:

In the case of an inability to provide them, the real world is highly unsympathetic.

I think that evidently that's not quite a factual statement, since this whole thread started out of your annoyance at people being what you perceive as too sympathetic.

However, other examples are readily available, such as the Special Olympics, in which all parties are rewarded regardless of performance

Oh yeah, damn those Special Olympians! Jeeze.

*The Wikipedia article for the novel links to the article on Political Correctness, for no readily discernable reason.

[Marelo]

Those girls are definitely playing in the wrong league, no two ways about it.

There we go, that's what I'm trying to say.

[phil_]

Was the game and its result cancelled or altered in any way?Forfeiting after the game would alter the result, and the winners are trying to forfeit, so yeah, results are being altered along with this apology. Not that this makes Harrison Bergeron relevant; it's just a remark about poorly chosen extra clauses.

And I'm done with this. The whole scenario is far too stupid for me to bear thinking about it more.

[Krylo]

I know that when I played in high school, we were told that if we were either winning or losing by more than 24 or so points, we or the other team would loosen up a bit. It's not that they were apologizing that the other team was bad, but at 60-0, for the sake of the players and the parents, slowing down would be nice. According to my newspaper, the winning team was still playing full court press AND shooting 3 pointers. There's like an unwritten (and in some leagues actual written) law that says to kind of slow up if you're winning by a lot. I know that when I played softball, we were also told that if we scored 14 runs, the game would end automatically as to not embarrass the other team.

It's silly, but think of how the other team must have felt, not being able to score a point and still getting just beaten and beaten. It certainly didn't help their morale.

Would it have helped morale more knowing that the other team backed up and GAVE them points? Being allowed to 'win' or even allowed to 'score a point' is a harder blow to a person's ego than just getting shut out. Not only are they better than you, but they're so much better that they PITY you. That just ain't right. A pity point is just a reminder of how damn terrible you are.

Or, worse, you DON'T realize that they started just giving you the points, and think you actually scored against them. It gives you an unrealistic idea of how good you are and how much you have to improve. An unrealistic idea that is going to be destroyed when someone not so nice comes around.

Sugar coating people's abilities (or lack there of) doesn't help anyone in the long run.

Plus Even if you are losing, you might as well keep playing. Keep trying, and it's going to be OK.At a shootaround Thursday, several Dallas Academy players said they were frustrated during the game but felt it was a learning opportunity.

The 'learning disadvantaged' kids are smarter than the entirety of society. If you don't go up against people who are better than you and try your hardest you never get better.

such as the Special Olympics, in which all parties are rewarded regardless of performance.

Not a good comparison.

If you've got the balls to try to run the hurdles in an actual competition which people are watching with no actual honest to god legs, you should probably be rewarded regardless of how terribly you do at it.

Plus, a lot of them are mentally disadvantaged too, and are incapable of understanding winning and losing like normal people.

[Archbio]

They just should probably include an overkill rule. It's natural not to be happy about winning by too big a margin at a sport or a game.

[MasterOfMagic]

Yeah, I'm surprised there's no mercy rule in there anywhere. Then again, it is varsity basketball. Around here the winning coach just puts in his "B-team", which is really great for the B-team's self esteem.

[bluestarultor]

Would it have helped morale more knowing that the other team backed up and GAVE them points? Being allowed to 'win' or even allowed to 'score a point' is a harder blow to a person's ego than just getting shut out. Not only are they better than you, but they're so much better that they PITY you. That just ain't right. A pity point is just a reminder of how damn terrible you are.

Or, worse, you DON'T realize that they started just giving you the points, and think you actually scored against them. It gives you an unrealistic idea of how good you are and how much you have to improve. An unrealistic idea that is going to be destroyed when someone not so nice comes around.

Sugar coating people's abilities (or lack there of) doesn't help anyone in the long run.

This. This right here.

Plus

The 'learning disadvantaged' kids are smarter than the entirety of society. If you don't go up against people who are better than you and try your hardest you never get better.

They're smart, but the people handling them don't seem to share the sentiment. That was more my point in the first place.

Not a good comparison.

If you've got the balls to try to run the hurdles in an actual competition which people are watching with no actual honest to god legs, you should probably be rewarded regardless of how terribly you do at it.

Plus, a lot of them are mentally disadvantaged too, and are incapable of understanding winning and losing like normal people.

I'll admit I'm biased on this point. I have nothing against the physically handicapped competing. Far from it, actually. I think that people with physical handicaps have every right to compete and would encourage it, because they need some way of proving to themselves and everyone else that there's really nothing wrong with them and that they can contribute to society.

However, they actually can conceptualize winning and losing, and I feel that giving them a medal regardless of their performance is an insult.

Likewise, I am TOTALLY against competitions that comprise of parents running their kids around in wheelchairs as they sit and drool. If a kid has no idea what's going on, the competition is meaningless and the time and resources could be better spent elsewhere on more productive matters, like making sure that more kids don't end up like that.

I suppose I am, at heart, a practical person, but to me, a competition is about what you can get out of it. That's what bothers me about the Special Olympics and situations like the one we're discussing.

[Wyndon]

Sugar coating people's abilities (or lack there of) doesn't help anyone in the long run.


I mean. This is high school girl's basketball. I don't really know if that applies here. In professional sports? Sure thing. But high school level sports is meant to be more fun than really competitive. I fully agree that this was pretty distasteful. I don't knock the covenant girls for winning, but I knock them for taking the score to the friggin' TRIPLE DIGITS when clearly they KNEW they were going to win.

That's pretty poor sportsmanship. High School Basketball is only a game, it's not a job, nor some super important olympic event in which you need to prove yourself to the fullest. I mean, what about the girls on the other team? Could you imagine how shitty they felt? How helpless all the (previously) excited parents felt, consoling their kids?

I mean, that's a pretty big ego-killer. And unnecessary. I think 60-0 Would have been a decent place to stop. That's a clear message without taking it over the top. People need to respect each other more these days :shifty:

(edited for typo)

[Marelo]

Wyndon, the article quotes several members of the losing team as being unfazed and even excited about it.

[Kim]

Not to mention, I hardly think the parents or any of the players thought they were going to win. They haven't won a game in years. I highly doubt they went into this one thinking, "This is totally going to be the one we win! Definitely!" Besides, you can still have a fun time while losing, and I hardly think anyone went and harassed them for doing poorly.

[bluestarultor]

To be more specific, since people don't seem to be reading the article, the last time they won a game was over four years ago. That means that even the oldest members on the team have never seen a single win.

Somehow, I think that Noncon is on to something with the expecting to win thing.

[Fifthfiend]

First moving to General because HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL.

Second dude guys I don't know how much some of you follow high school sports but inasmuch as I've had anything to do with it on any level in pretty much any situation like this yes it is the winner's responsibility to not turn an unarguable win into an ultra-douchey blowout, it's like Rule 1 in the Not Being A Douche Book of High School Sportsmanship. It's like you know how in Boxing if one boxer punches the other boxer until he can't get up anymore? Well what he generally doesn't do after that is get on top of the other boxer with his knee to the other man's throat and continue punching him in the skull past the point of unconsciousness. This is sort of like that.

I mean if nothing else once you decide to go ahead and make that your reputation? Pretty much what's going to happen is every other team you play against is going to say "Hey guys look its Team Asshole" and light you the fuck up any way they can, because people tend to take unkindly to the prospect of being on the receiving end of that sort of thing. If a team knows once you've hit fifty damn points over whatever score you have, you're going to go ahead and run up fifty more? You're kind of taking away any incentive they might have had not to elbow you in the face at the first opportunity.

And hell, sugarcoating? At the point of say, fifty points to zero, what all amount of sugarcoating is going on? What point are you making about your relative athletic capabilities by scoring your second fifty points, that you didn't make when you scored the first fifty points (while ensuring that the other team scored zero points)?

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I must say that when I used to play high school sports if we got a ridiculous lead by halftime we would just switch up teams for the second half.
I mean sure you can make arguments about sugar coating wins and things but this is not the echelons of academic competition. Most of these kids just want to have a fun time, get some excercise, have a run. Getting whipped is not fun.
And even if there is some body on the winning team who is set to go onto a professional career theyre not going to get much valuable experience playing to the max against these guys and they're not going to impress any scouts with thier ability to thrash a weak team.

I mean we don't want to disillusion the kids and things but just rubbing in the beating is a bit cruel. It's a bit of fun.

[Krylo]

All I'm saying is that in every competitive thing I've ever done, from video games, to sports, to, I don't know, competitive baking--it has always, always, made me feel a million times worse to have whoever I was up against decide that I was so bad that they didn't even need to try than to just be completely and irrevocably defeated.

Especially on the occasions I didn't find out they weren't trying their best until later.

There's a certain... feeling of honor or accomplishment in standing up to someone better than you who's doing their best, even if you lose. Even if you lose completely and indelibly.

To find out they weren't even trying cheapens and destroys even that.

Maybe I'm the only person in the world who feels this way? I don't know. Whatever. I just know I'd rather lose 100-0 than to have them back off in the second half and start handling me with kiddy gloves. If whoever you're up against keeps on doing the best they can--even when you're losing--it at least shows that they think you're worth trying. You guys think it's poor sportsmanship NOT to back off--I think it's poor sportsmanship TO back off. To stop trying is the far greater insult to another person or team.

[TheWolf13]

The winning school took all the initiative in apologizing and seeking a forfeit. It wasn't like the other team laid down on the court and cried. No one cried foul. Also they are in a division for private schools. A lot of times you get matched up against other private schools regardless of size and skill level. Imagine the New England Patriots playing your high school team and going all out.

If I were the coach of the next team to play them I'd tell my players to try and injure as many of theirs as possible because it isn't against the rules.

[MasterOfMagic]

If I were the coach of the next team to play them I'd tell my players to try and injure as many of theirs as possible because it isn't against the rules.
Yeah, it kinda is?

[Krylo]

The winning school took all the initiative in apologizing and seeking a forfeit. It wasn't like the other team laid down on the court and cried. No one cried foul. Also they are in a division for private schools. A lot of times you get matched up against other private schools regardless of size and skill level. Imagine the New England Patriots playing your high school team and going all out.I'd probably be a bit amazed that a professional team decided they had to go all out on a high school team. Honestly, to me, it would show that said professional team felt that said high school team was WORTH something, because the only time you don't try your hardest is when you're up against someone who isn't worth trying your hardest. Someone you can beat anyway.

Even if it's just a lie that you have to try your hardest to beat someone, it at least shows you have enough respect for them as players, sportsmen, and other human beings, to not treat them like second class players.

Being pitied isn't something I like.

Like I said--maybe I'm the only person who feels that way, but the way I feel about winning, losing, and competing is the basis of my argument. And, honestly, the way the losing team reacted, looking at the story, says to me that they feel the same way about it. Frustrated that they got trounced? Sure, but they took it as a learning experience, and walked away with a feeling that they did their best, and the other team did their best, and it was a good game regardless of the outcome.

If I were the coach of the next team to play them I'd tell my players to try and injure as many of theirs as possible because it isn't against the rules.Because adults should totally goad teenagers into seriously injuring each other?

That's mature.

[Marc v4.0]

Because all teenagers want to run the risk of possibly completely ruining another persons career and life through debilitating injury or even paralyzation/death.

Taking it a good bit too far to even say that.

[bluestarultor]

Because all teenagers want to run the risk of possibly completely ruining another persons career and life through debilitating injury or even paralyzation/death.

Taking it a good bit too far to even say that.

Hey, kids get hurt in sports. Knew a guy once who'd had three knee surgeries in two years, and more after that. He played football. Completely ruined his chances for playing for college. A lot of times, they DO try to hurt the star players.

Edit: Also was friends with a wrestler. Gary actually lost his match because the other guy twisted his knee straight out of its socket. It counted. He was never able to wrestle again and he's living in constant pain due to all the damage to the cartilage.

[Marc v4.0]

Ok, maybe I should have specified it as those teenagers without possible psychological problems

or better, in their right mind

[Kim]

Basically everything Krylo said. If I were say... playing someone in Street Fighter. I suck. I know I suck. But I'd rather suck against someone doing their best than suck against someone going easy on me because I suck so bad. At least I'll learn something, and it's still fun anyways.

[Mondt]

Scouts + Less competition = Better chance.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Scouts + Less competition = Better chance.

But you simply cannot demonstrate how good you are if your opposition is crap. If yuo score 40 points in a game because there is no defence the scout is going to see that and ignore it. Scouting is not about stats, it's about spoting potential.
Thrasing weak opponents takes little skill and you can't show your, say, tacital nouse if the opponents have no defence set-up or your super fakes if you not being marked properly.

As for wanting your opponent to play as hard as they can, they already established that in the first half. This is not one team being simply better than the other, this is a complete gulf of class.
When the other team is that much better than you you won't learn anything if they just completely dominate you. It the same as when I'm teaching someone to play sports I don't play all out at the start, I play gentle so they can learn from me at slower paces and less intensity.

[MasterOfMagic]

Hey, kids get hurt in sports. Knew a guy once who'd had three knee surgeries in two years, and more after that. He played football. Completely ruined his chances for playing for college. A lot of times, they DO try to hurt the star players.

Edit: Also was friends with a wrestler. Gary actually lost his match because the other guy twisted his knee straight out of its socket. It counted. He was never able to wrestle again and he's living in constant pain due to all the damage to the cartilage.

Well, the point was that things like this are horrible, and one shouldn't really think encouraging it is okay in any circumstance.

[bluestarultor]

Well, the point was that things like this are horrible, and one shouldn't really think encouraging it is okay in any circumstance.

That was pretty much my point. It happens and shouldn't be taken lightly. The post in question just came off as a bit flippant to me, I guess. :sweatdrop

[MasterOfMagic]

That was pretty much my point. It happens and shouldn't be taken lightly. The post in question just came off as a bit flippant to me, I guess. :sweatdrop
Ah, it sounded like you were somehow trying to defend this: "If I were the coach of the next team to play them I'd tell my players to try and injure as many of theirs as possible because it isn't against the rules." which is what the person you quoted was sarcastically replying to.

[bluestarultor]

Ah, it sounded like you were somehow trying to defend this: "If I were the coach of the next team to play them I'd tell my players to try and injure as many of theirs as possible because it isn't against the rules." which is what the person you quoted was sarcastically replying to.

No, my point was more that it really does happen and that it should be taken more seriously.

The worst part is that Gary's coach tried to talk him into coming back after that injury because he was a good heavyweight wrestler. Gary was trying to actually lose weight to help make walking less painful. Some of these coaches show absolutely no concern for kids' well-being.

[Fifthfiend]

All I'm saying is that in every competitive thing I've ever done, from video games, to sports, to, I don't know, competitive baking--it has always, always, made me feel a million times worse to have whoever I was up against decide that I was so bad that they didn't even need to try than to just be completely and irrevocably defeated.

Especially on the occasions I didn't find out they weren't trying their best until later.

There's a certain... feeling of honor or accomplishment in standing up to someone better than you who's doing their best, even if you lose. Even if you lose completely and indelibly.

To find out they weren't even trying cheapens and destroys even that.

Maybe I'm the only person in the world who feels this way? I don't know. Whatever. I just know I'd rather lose 100-0 than to have them back off in the second half and start handling me with kiddy gloves. If whoever you're up against keeps on doing the best they can--even when you're losing--it at least shows that they think you're worth trying. You guys think it's poor sportsmanship NOT to back off--I think it's poor sportsmanship TO back off. To stop trying is the far greater insult to another person or team.

The thing that I find mismatched here is that the other team in all probability wasn't particularly trying at all. A team that holds another team to 50-0 in the first place is not going to be a team that is required to play their all regardless. Yeah there's a feeling of accomplishment in standing up to someone better than you who's doing their best, but there's not a whole lot of that in getting kicked down by someone better than you who continues kicking just to show how hard they don't have to try in order to do it. I mean for chrissakes a full court press? That's not someone kicking your ass in Street Fighter, it's someone kicking your ass in Street Fighter with one hand while he jerks his dick with the other and then when he wins he spooges on your sneakers. That's playing Soul Calibur and some douche setting up that 64-button combo attack that nobody ever actually uses in a competitive game because who the fuck has time for that, because they know you can't do shit to stop them and they wanna show how awesome they are by having Ivy tapdance on your face.

[bluestarultor]

UPDATE:

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=904726


Apparently, the winning coach has been fired.

[Fifthfiend]

My values and my beliefs would not allow me to run up the score on any opponent, and it will not allow me to apologize for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with honor and integrity."

Sounds like there's a coach who's mastered that special style of FucknCrazy.

"My values wouldn't allow me to be a douche, therefore, the incredibly douchey thing I just did can't actually be douchey, because then I would be a douche! Which I am not! instead, what would be douchey would have been not being a douche, which I didn't do, because I am! Which means I'm not!

Wheeeeee!"

[Ugainius]

I have to agree with fifth. There is a point Where the whole hating being pitied thing gets overrideen by a sensation of uselessness.

[Preturbed]

UPDATE:

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=904726


Apparently, the winning coach has been fired.

Headline: Successful coach fired for doing his job, poor coach retained for not doing his.

That's really a step too far, winning school.

[Marc v4.0]

Headline: Successful coach fired for doing his job, poor coach retained for not doing his.

That's really a step too far, winning school.

That'll teach those damn winners to do all that winning! Really is a step too far, considering the winning school seems to be the only one that really cares it won by so much as to make such a fuss over it.

[synkr0nized]

ahahah

I just noticed that these are private schools. No wonder this is happening and being so overblown.

[Raiden]

...alright, this is pretty damn ridiculous.

Schools: If you don't want the feelings of your kids to be hurt ever, don't make a damn sport team. Feelings get hurt. Know why? Because EVERY TIME THERE'S A GAME, SOMEONE WILL LOSE. It's not fun to lose, but someone will always lose. If you fear for them feeling bad, let them join something else. What would you do if the test scores of your students surpass those of schools around you? Tell them to hold back? "Play dumb so the other schools don't feel bad." No, you play with your all because it builds character and defines a person later in life. You blame someone for "trying too hard", you're part of the problem. Stop it.

Parents: If you agreed to let your child join a competitive sport, do not get angry when they lose. Sometimes, other kids are simply better. Instead of blaming other children for being better, help your kid get better.

Losing Players: Good on you.

Winning Players: You have no reason to be ashamed for winning. The losing team knew what they were getting into the moment they put on a uniform and hit the court. They hadn't won a game the last four years, and that does not mean you need to go easy on them. You don't need to apologize for having worked hard, built strong teamwork, and becoming a great team.

Seriously. I've been in extracurricular activities, and if someone told me I would have to apologize for winning, I would quit the team. Because you join a team to play a game, not to hold people's hands and worry about how everyone feels. They played the game fairly, they played the game honestly. Yes, they were throwing 3-pointers in the fourth quarter. Whoop-de-fricking-do. You know how HARD it is to reliably hit a 3-pointer? If they had wanted to crush them, they'd have played a Lay Up game and buried them in at least twice as many points. Hell, they were probably trying to loosen up by shooting 3-pointers in the hope that they'd miss and the other team would get the ball.

Just...ridiculous when fair winners need to apologize for having worked hard and succeeding. Ridiculous.