Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Physical Play

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #61
    Originally posted by Guest View Post

    Yes, it is not uncommon. The most competitive girls want to win and don't want to come off the field. They'll go to the team that wins, in the best league they can get into.

    If your kid is on the bottom third of the roster, you should reasonably expect 1/3 to 1/2 playing time. If your kid is on the top 1/3 of roster, expect 2/3 plus playing time.

    FWIW, practicing with the top team and getting 1/3 playing time is fat better than more playing time on a lower team. You can't easily replicate speed of the game. You can't advance certain skills if you're surrounded by lower skilled players.

    If your kid isn't getting 1/3 playing time, talk to the coach about getting to that level. It isn't too much to ask.

    Don't listen to those who pontificate on how it "should be*, or how it was in the "good old days". Useless.​​​​
    Utter crap. You are paying the same as everyone else and 11 years olds should be getting nearly equal PT. Earning PT shouldn't start come into play until U14 prior to HS, and even then PT should still be meaningful.

    Your premise about being a bench warmer also won't apply to all. Many B teams are quite good with good coaches. Not all A team coaches or teams are significantly better.

    Comment


      #62
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      A group of girls on a team play a style that is more physical than most girls teams, not dirty, but very aggressive (in games, trainings, and when fooling around together, between games/before after training sessions). There is a player that is considered "soft" on the team by the players/parents. The player constantly cries and does seem to have emotional issues, never sits with the team during breaks or between games, has very rare social interaction outside soccer with the team, and has been invited numerous times to join in outside group activities, but no change in the situation. She feels that when this group "hurts" her, they are doing it intentionally. That is not the case, but ok, that's how the player feels. The coach has not once advised us parents that we need to speak with our girls in regard to this "issue". This players parents are now calling out another player and their parents on the team, face to face in front of their children, saying that their child was intentionally hurt. Again, not the case at all. The player has other athletic interests, and misses a lot due to the other sports. That is not the case with the rest of the team, so that does cause a bit of a disconnect with her and the group. The player goes to the same school with some of these girls, so a soccer "breakup" would spill over at school is the other issue. I know there will be many troll responses here... Looking for suggestions on how you as a parent would handle this situation? This family has had the same issue with another one of their children (4 teams in 4 years). We like the family, but it seems most on the team are growing very tired of wearing "kid gloves" around this player.
      Are you really posting about u9 soccer? How about the adults handle it with the club.

      Comment


        #63
        Originally posted by Guest View Post

        Utter crap. You are paying the same as everyone else and 11 years olds should be getting nearly equal PT. Earning PT shouldn't start come into play until U14 prior to HS, and even then PT should still be meaningful.

        Your premise about being a bench warmer also won't apply to all. Many B teams are quite good with good coaches. Not all A team coaches or teams are significantly better.
        I am a huge advocate that young-age soccer should focus on development and not results. However, equal playing time is not the norm or expectation. The lowest player(s) on a team usually get 50% playing time. Top kids get more. If your kid is getting less than 50%, you have a legit gripe.
        Additional things to consider, in comparison to the top kids does the lower player make equal amounts of trainings, do they exert equal amounts of effort, do the spend equal amounts of time training at home. If a top kid is putting in all of that extra effort and not getting a benefit out of it, they will leave to go somewhere else. The lower kid also has that option.

        Comment


          #64
          Originally posted by Guest View Post

          Are you really posting about u9 soccer? How about the adults handle it with the club.
          Unless it reaches the point of true bullying, let the kids sort it out. Social skills and dynamics are learned through trial and error. There are social consequences for being a lazy whiny teammate. She will either change or be ostracized. Either way she learns something.

          Comment


            #65
            Originally posted by Guest View Post

            I am a huge advocate that young-age soccer should focus on development and not results. However, equal playing time is not the norm or expectation. The lowest player(s) on a team usually get 50% playing time. Top kids get more. If your kid is getting less than 50%, you have a legit gripe.
            Additional things to consider, in comparison to the top kids does the lower player make equal amounts of trainings, do they exert equal amounts of effort, do the spend equal amounts of time training at home. If a top kid is putting in all of that extra effort and not getting a benefit out of it, they will leave to go somewhere else. The lower kid also has that option.
            Some of those so called top kids at the younger ages are bigger or faster. They don't necessarily work harder at it. Late bloomers often get the shaft, which is why coaches shouldn't give up on the them. The ones that can get through that and keep working at their skills will reap rewards later on when puberty has leveled out in HS. I agree that at least until 7th grade every player should be getting at least 50%. You never know where it's going to go with these kids physically and emotionally. Toughness starts to matter a whole lot more in HS.

            Comment


              #66
              Originally posted by Guest View Post

              Utter crap. You are paying the same as everyone else and 11 years olds should be getting nearly equal PT. Earning PT shouldn't start come into play until U14 prior to HS, and even then PT should still be meaningful..
              And there it is. Mommy wrote her check so her D needs to be on the top team getting the playing time. This sad story plays out over and over.

              And if you're teaching your D that she doesn't have to work hard to earn her way, then I pity you.

              Comment


                #67
                Originally posted by Guest View Post

                And there it is. Mommy wrote her check so her D needs to be on the top team getting the playing time. This sad story plays out over and over.

                And if you're teaching your D that she doesn't have to work hard to earn her way, then I pity you.
                Clearly you don't understand the critical difference between "meaningful" vs "equal" PT. And the discussion is about younger kids vs 8th grade and older. As you get older yes PT is earned. Benching 11 year olds and getting paid for it borders on criminal.

                Comment

                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                Auto-Saved
                x
                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                x
                Working...
                X