Historically the first MHL has always been for first-timers only. In recent years, we have added a JV division. So far, no problem. But this year, a couple of schools that were involved in a two-round scrimmage wanted to come, but would have been disallowed because they were no longer first-timers. What the hey, we said, no one will have debated much, so we will just call it the first MHL. We were being good guys all the way.
It didn’t work. In addition to those hapless scrimmagers, there were some debaters hitting the boards for the 4th time this season, which gave them an overwhelming advantage over the raw noobs. Not that the first MHL is about winning over your opponent so much as winning over your adrenaline and just getting the hang of things, but this was counterproductive in the extreme. The executive council (O’C and I, with Kurt unavailable for comment) of the MHL has decreed the following for next year:
1. First-timers is reinstated as first-timers. If you’ve debated elsewhere, then that was your first-timer event; leave this one for somebody else.
2. If you debated in middle school, then you aren’t a novice in the eyes of the MHL.
2. JV is, simply put, sophomores in their second year; sophomores who debated in middle school are not permitted, nor are juniors in their third year. Exemptions will be granted on a request basis (for juniors in their second year, but we want absolute clarity on this).
The thing is, there is no place for third year debaters at the MHL, whether they are JV in their third overall year in high school or in a combo of middle and high school. For the life of me I can’t see how debating down does much of anything except give an obvious win to the over-experienced student who will, as a result, not get any better, and give an obvious loss to a student who, at least in this one venue, ought to have had a chance. It’s tough enough being a novice or young JVer. Being a novice or young JVer against impossible competition is a disservice to everyone involved.
Of course, I don’t want to give the wrong impression. For the most part, the bazillion debaters at Bronco Scientology on Saturday were in the right place at the right time, and all the usual novice follies ensued. They’re so cute before they start reading Foucault! They get lost, they are struck dumb, they ask when it will end… So cute. But of course, you’re reading this blog because you want the dirt, and as usual, there were a couple of schools (same ones year after year) that were up to their old tricks, in addition to the above (which, honestly, was our own damned fault). Such as:
“Hi. I’d like to change the following thirty entries.” Incorrectly.
And,
“We’re all here and accounted for.” Except the ones who weren’t there and accounted for, because we never even bothered to check.
And,
“Our judge has to go home now. He’s got to get his flatulence vaccine.” Or some other excuse. One wonders how these goobers expect a tournament to run every round without judges judging every round. Maybe they think we have an endless supply of the ever-popular Clarence Thomas inflatable SCOTUS dolls that we can prop them up in the back of the room with a pad and pen. Jeesh!
The problem in at least one of these cases was the lack of an adult signing in. I missed it in the rush. Next time, I’m carding them! In other cases, it was willfully ignoring the 27 emails I sent telling them that we were not interested in their shenanigans. On the positive side, the vast majority of registrants were shenanigan-free, for which I thank them enthusiastically. As for you yo-yos who just don’t get it, you try our patience! But our patience is not available as free samples. You have to earn it. You have not.
I’ll be bringing my army of attack gerbils to registration at Byram and Monticello. Be warned!
No comments:
Post a Comment