The issue of working with kids with different levels of commitment and different agendas must be a common problem for coaches, such as when putting together relay teams of runners who have other events ahead of them in the same meet, even the same day. However, I agree with comments that the coach must bear some of the blame here.
Compare this team with schools running in the recent New Balance Nationals Indoor meet, where some distance kids ran multiple top-level relay legs. Take the obvious success story in Loudoun Valley (The Jungle), for instance. Some of their kids ran top-level splits on THREE winning distance relay teams – Jacob Hunter, Connor Wells, and Sam Affolder! In fact, Affolder was named Track & Field News magazine’s high school athlete of the year, and the clincher was his running at NBNI, all relay splits: a 4:06 1600 anchor leg in Friday’s DMR NR-setting win, then a 4:06 split in Saturday’s 4xMile NR-setting win, and then a 1:51 split in the 4x800 3rd all-time (I think) race/win.
Yeah, they’re a special school, with tremendous coaching, but racing a kid in three distance events on successive days (all relays, in The Jungle’s case) is something any team can/should train for! Coaches are sometimes saddled with bad eggs, but a coach should still have some ability to get more out of his or her kids. Or, as has been pointed out, the order of runners in the OP’s example should have been changed so that the anchor could save himself for a chance to excel in a later individual event, without pissing off his teammates or coach, if he found himself in a position where an all-out effort wouldn’t have advanced his team.
Back in high school, I was on such a 4x800 team in the state meet. On a team which clearly had the potential to win a medal, an injury to our second runner knocked us out of contention. Our anchor, one of the top contenders in the open mile that same day, took it easy in order to save himself for the later race. We, his teammates, completely understood.