While there were dozens of "reports" in nearly every media outlet in the region (thank you, Google) and a bunch nationally...

... I found only one discussing what they were arguing -- the accusation that team from the small midwestern state was "striking" judges for reason of race. The rest focus on the visible antics.

This is fascinating: the ways that this could be understood (midwestern vs. (almost) eastern, heartland vs. city, regional school vs. national, research school) in addition to the racial issue.

(It seems to me something wonderfully unexplored in that a middle-of-nowhere school can compete with U/Pitt in the debate arena when otherwise the R1 doesn't even have to acknowledge that the UG schools exist.)

But yes: both coaches seem to catch fire in this post-debate; one was unfortunate enough to do so in view of the camera and to do so with nonverbals interpretable even if the audio makes it impossible to make out what they are discussing. (One student of Shanahan's has said that the U/Pitt coach was swearing under her breath.)

This article says its not unusual. I'm no debater: is this true?
"“It says something unfortunate about our culture. People love to overreact, and then it’s 10 minutes later,” says Kevin Rabinowitz, a former University of Georgia debater and a 2006-07 winner of one of its highest honors, the Copeland Award. “People get their kicks, then it’s on to the next story.”"

...

There is a nice YouTube interview with Shanahan about how a successful debate requires an openness to being challenged and a willingness to risk your self, rather than cling to your position in the hegemony that steamrolls difference.

It's called "Shanahan on Magic of Debate" at youtube

Thanks for the post!

db