Talking-Soccer.com  

Go Back   Talking-Soccer.com > Soccer By Region / State > Region 1 > New York

Notices

New York Discussions about New York soccer.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Thanks. Any know score of 18/19 game
0-0.........
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
I totally disagree. There's a much wider variation in growth rates for boys than with girls. A kid with a later bdate is more likely to be smaller, then couple that with being a late bloomer? A kid could have great potential but has a tough time keeping up with bigger, faster players (an even bigger issue with the combined age group teams). Should he be tossed aside just because he won't his growth spurt until 16? And don't pull the "Messi is tiny" card. We're not talking about unicorns, just more typical DA players.

I believe it is limited to two players per team and the date has to be late. Won't stop clubs from abusing it unfortunately.
Completely agree with the above poster. There is no need to throw out kids, especially those who have been in the DA system for a few years, due to late development. What a waste of resources and talent.

That said, I've already seen abuse of this rule being used as a way to get players, who clearly have no physical development delay, some time on the field. A simple solution to curb such abuse is to have players provide a medical doctor's note at the beginning of the season, verifying that they are physical late developers. Most kids with cases severe enough to warrant playing down will have been checked out by a doctor at some point when younger to make sure they were growing properly.

It's not about height, there are plenty of small kids who are on an early or normal physical development curve and have plenty of muscle mass by 15/16 to play with their birth year. The late developers won't have this same strength and will naturally have difficulty competing. Month of birth should have no bearing on who is able to play down, either. A two year delayed developer born in May is obviously going to be physically behind a one year delayed December born kid.

This rule is a good idea, but definitely needs some clear restrictions put into place so that it's used only as USSF intended.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Completely agree with the above poster. There is no need to throw out kids, especially those who have been in the DA system for a few years, due to late development. What a waste of resources and talent.

That said, I've already seen abuse of this rule being used as a way to get players, who clearly have no physical development delay, some time on the field. A simple solution to curb such abuse is to have players provide a medical doctor's note at the beginning of the season, verifying that they are physical late developers. Most kids with cases severe enough to warrant playing down will have been checked out by a doctor at some point when younger to make sure they were growing properly.

It's not about height, there are plenty of small kids who are on an early or normal physical development curve and have plenty of muscle mass by 15/16 to play with their birth year. The late developers won't have this same strength and will naturally have difficulty competing. Month of birth should have no bearing on who is able to play down, either. A two year delayed developer born in May is obviously going to be physically behind a one year delayed December born kid.

This rule is a good idea, but definitely needs some clear restrictions put into place so that it's used only as USSF intended.
Since in GDA the game results aren't supposed to matter, it's all about development of players that will hopefully join the NT at some point in the future, then in theory being a bit flexible with the age group rules makes sense.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Since in GDA the game results aren't supposed to matter, it's all about development of players that will hopefully join the NT at some point in the future, then in theory being a bit flexible with the age group rules makes sense.
lol game results don't matter....lol lol. They matter to the clubs that's for sure, hence why 1) the rule was created and 2) the rule will be abused
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
lol game results don't matter....lol lol. They matter to the clubs that's for sure, hence why 1) the rule was created and 2) the rule will be abused
I said "in theory", lol.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 1 Week Ago
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I hope this is from the Onion.

https://www.thenutmegnews.com/curren...-transfermarkt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.