tigersfan

Must not apply to MTP star athletes around region tournament time. I bet the other kid involved got 3 days... Sounds like the kid* needs to stop and screw his head on straight before its too late. Getting special treatment sure isn't gonna help matters any. Do you know anything about the situation--or are you just speculating?

I looked all over the county Code of Conduct and couldnt find anything about your "zero tolerance on fighting." I'm guessing discipline is up to each individual situation.

Way to go MtP!

Now Mt Pleasant plays Collinwood at home--when?

Willie, I haven't posted much--but have read lots. I have come to respect you. Your posts are honest, fair, and knowledgeable. Everything I believe about you comes directly from that--your posts. I don't know much about the situation--but I do know the young man. I don't believe that Mt. Pleasant coaches and admin intended to allow the situation to go uninvestigated--and that is the tone of some posts.

I can only comment from many moons ago when I played--the ref was right. The 5 second count doesn't stop till someone touches the ball. The floor doesn't count as someone. Your wrong, go read the rules! I posted it actually on here, it stops when the ball is released by the inbounder. Glad you found it. There is no excuse for the ref not knowing the rule--although I think I might be excused for not knowing.

I can only comment from many moons ago when I played--the ref was right. The 5 second count doesn't stop till someone touches the ball. The floor doesn't count as someone.

The SH administration and the school SRO stepped in at halftime. I don't think the coach or player had much of a choice. I do know that the MTP administration wanted to wait until after the game to deal with the issue but SH would not have it. MTP beat Collinwood last night and the kid had a big game. So did SH benefit from the disruption of the game and players? Did it help the outcome of the situation to disrupt the game? Was it a situation that could have been handled by waiting until the game was over? I get the feeling that you are saying MTP wouldn't have handled it at all.

First, it is obvious that you do care if he gets punished. You said he should be out for the season. Second, it is very disappointing if the administration from any school discussed a private matter concerning a child. That is very unprofessional. Third, just because a student is accused of something doesn't mean he did it. Fourth, he did play against CA. I think he came in the game sometime during the second quarter. He was not effective at all. CA beat MP. MP couldn't make easy buckets around the rim. I thought MP played very good defense. That was evident from the fact that CA's leading scorer didn't even score. How often does that happen? But in the end CA did beat MP. That's why you play the game. CA was the better team that night. First... No I don't care but the proper actions should take place if it did happen no matter what school the player is from. Second... who says that administration discussed this with me or that I'm not part of the administration? Third... something must have happened because the player did not play the 2nd half of the game Saturday night and the player was some how involved even if the player knew he was involved or notl You know that. I don't need to and won't discuss details on here. This whole argument isn't like you willie. I looked back through this thread and didn't find one single incident of Mt. Pleasant fans shifting blame anywhere for losses (I admit it was late and I was scanning). I haven't seen them make excuses for not playing well. Why do you keep saying --Fourth... for the third time I said I'm glad he played against CA even if he didn't have an effect on the game because if he didn't play and CA won MTP fans would be saying well if "Player" played then CA wouldn't have won.

What statement are you trying to make? That MTP doesn't discipline as well as they should. On what are you basing that statement? Are you suggesting that you know the details and the outcome of a situation that didn't get handled in a way that it should have?

SFWildcatBlood wrote What statement are you trying to make?

Sounds to me like the coach did the right thing. If that is a rule--and the kid knew it--it doesn't matter if he is the LEADING scorer. He deserves to be punished. No player should be above the rules! What kind of coach would he be if he turned a blind eye to a player's disreguard and disrespect for the rules? How long would it take before the rest of the team thought they too should be able to behave in any manner they chose? How long before they ran rough shod over anyone who tried to coach them? Maybe it seems trivial to you--maybe it seems like an issue of "just the socks"--but maybe the coach knows where respect begins.

Folks/Fans on The HILL are starting to think their might be a problem within the administration if Scharsch leaves. He's got the program going in the right direction and there is alot of excitement among the players and the community in general. If he leaves, it might be time for the school board and central office to take a hard look at the school administration. Since 2000 SH has had total of 6 coaches: Coach Cox: '95-'02. Coach Mizner: '03. Coach McKnight: '04 Coach Stone: '05 (filled in as interim while McKnight was serving in Army) Coach McKnight: '06-'07 Coach DeLaughter: '08 (accepted job, stayed 2 weeks, then went back to McCallie) Coach Scharsch: '08-present. Hard to build a program with so much turnover in Head Coaches and assistances. I agree admin may be a problem--seems to have been as many changes in the Principal's job as there have been in head coaches. Do you happen to know those too 66?

No matter how many--or how few teams are in Division II they deserve the same consideration and same respect as any other team in the TSSAA. This argument is a valid one. Is Division II given a discount on TSSAA fees for playing their championship on a crappy night? Of course not! Does the TSSAA charge less at the gate to get into the game? No again! It would seem that the TSSAA couldn't care less--as long as they get what they want --money! I don't understand why the championship game for Division II couldn't be held the week following Division II playoffs--in a central location (who cares if it is different from Division I's location?)--in a Division II town--on a Friday or Saturday night.

Thanks--that's it

Isn't there an oldies station in Wayne County who live streams the games?

ITS ALMOST GAME TIME!!!!! GO TIGERS!!!!!!!

Took me a while to dig it out too!

This got pushed to the second page and "young" started another thread. Combine them young

What happened to the other page?

Did anybody ever win it besides Mt Pleasant?

Man--I hate that for him! I knew I could count on you to come through wholder

I'm not sure I see the big problem here...the rules used to be pretty straight forward in these matters. You have 3 years to play "junior high" sports (at least, that's the way it was back in the day). That includes 7th, 8th, and 9th grade. I know we had a kid on our team at MBA who did 8th grade twice (once elsewhere, then again at MBA). He got to play on the 7th-8th grade team as a second-time 8th grader, but couldn't play on the freshman team the following year. Had to play varsity (where, of course, he was on the bench the entire time). Sounds to me like MUS dropped the ball on this one. I can honestly say that I know very little about middle school rules these days, but I wonder if changes have been made since many public middle schools are now 5-8. I do know that some of those 5-8 middle schools don't allow 5th graders to try out for teams (I would imagine size and maturity are most often the cause)--I wonder if the rule is still 3 years to play?

That's sad!! Definately malicious!

I imagine you are right. I imagine the rules were different then. It never seems fair when someone has to sit out. It almost always feels punitive when something like that happens.