Youth Soccer - Tryouts/Rosters/Minimum Playing Time etc

[TKBC]

I look at the comments and then wonder to myself, has any one comment on here mentioned accountability from the boys? I've played for many years at various levels and now coach, offering a minimum amount of playing time is definitely a good idea but there are always circumstances when the playing time is NOT warranted.

I've has the pleasure to watch my boys team grow together, they have definitely improved since the end on last season, we've had a few excellent surprises and the work rate has increased greatly. The challenge in a couple of instances is that there are those, 1 or 2 that just refuse to complete their on-field tasks, they will not work even remotely close to the rest of the boys, they show little urgency and effort, they hold back the entire team because they lack the will to push through and do their part.

How do we justify playing them to a minimum, when in fact they behave as if they've completed their task once they made the team and all their hard work is done?

If you read my post you would have seen a comment similar to "unless there are behaviour issues." If a kid half-arsing it....no playing time or very little. But you have to be open and honest with everyone from day 1 about this, and then communicate with the player before reducing their time. They have to know and understand why they aren't getting time. They have to know and understand what to do to get the playing time back or earn even more. It's not difficult.

 

[TKBC]

Competition level amongst team-mates is healthy but when some do not provide the adequate level, they just do not deserve equal time. The challenging part is, how can you demote from MSL to Div 1?

By talking to the TD of the club, by talking to the player and parent, and then removing them from the team before the transfer deadline.

 

[Tom Duley]

If you read my post you would have seen a comment similar to "unless there are behaviour issues." If a kid half-arsing it....no playing time or very little. But you have to be open and honest with everyone from day 1 about this, and then communicate with the player before reducing their time. They have to know and understand why they aren't getting time. They have to know and understand what to do to get the playing time back or earn even more. It's not difficult.

I appreciate the comment and feedback.

I have been very transparent from day 1. When I initially got my team I knew I had my work cut out for me but I really felt we could improve and raise to the challenge. I took a team that all played Div.2 the previous year and now have them competing in Div.1.

The hardest part, in my case, has been that the majority, if not all, didn't come from a decent soccer culture. The kids didn't understand the commitment to hard work, they were never physically challenged, the majority have very poor basic skills...so trying to work at raising their level starting in April and preparing them to compete in September requires a lot of focus, discipline and effort, something many of them were not used to.

This one kid was above average in skills, shooting, passing, vision and very poor in positioning, effort, engaging and intensity. The 5 or 6 kids that were behind him in April have now surpassed him and play effectively, they now make a difference and definitely have improved in many areas....good contributors to the team.

I started my coaching position with these boys thinking I am going to have to rely on 4 or 5 but now I can say I have 12-14 that give me their best. The one kid has always taken the laid back approach to the game and when he was selected this year, I had a direct conversation with his parents and told them he was my last pick and that he'd get little playing time unless he raised his work rate level.

Part of this is my own fault I guess. I'm not the type of coach that thinks that only skill equals success and I enjoy working with boys that aren't as talented but have the will to be fighters on the field. Throughout my own playing years I played with several guys that were very good and effective because they knew their position, were hard nosed players and had good basic skills. The kid I have challenges with just won't move unless the ball is played to his feet and even then he shows little urgency to make the right play.

 

[Tom Duley]

By talking to the TD of the club, by talking to the player and parent, and then removing them from the team before the transfer deadline.

We aren't allowed to do that and in my case, our TD coaches an MSL team and has the same issue but with 3 of his players. It seems as if we are afraid to affect feelings and that there is no consequence (not sure what word to use) when a player won't compete at the level of his team-mates!

 

[Tom Duley]

If you read my post you would have seen a comment similar to "unless there are behaviour issues." If a kid half-arsing it....no playing time or very little. But you have to be open and honest with everyone from day 1 about this, and then communicate with the player before reducing their time. They have to know and understand why they aren't getting time. They have to know and understand what to do to get the playing time back or earn even more. It's not difficult.

I've had him for 1.5 years. I gave him a second chance because he showed signs of "wanting to achieve" during try-outs. Once he made the team, it all went downhill!

 

[socceroo]

Try outs. I will make a few comments about tryouts. I feel that tryouts are important and should be standardized. Players at higher levels should be ranked and rated ........... by an independent academy! When selections are made they should be a points based player evaluation. The current system is a secret and different for each and every club. We have players out there and the high end coaches don't even know how fast their selected players can run the 40. We have players out there that have never been measured for passing accuracy. They don't know their height, weight or whether they are left or right handed. I wont dwell on it, the list goes on and on. An independent points based player evaluation would eliminate the problems. Those player evaluations should be shared with the player immediately so that he or she will know where they stand and where they need to improve. There are out of district rules that limit players and teams from excelling. The current system is wrong in so many ways. An example of this is, players are rejected without knowing why .......... or even worse not knowing what is needed to improve upon. The fact that there are only a few selections or sometimes less than that, is disturbing, especially when you ask 30 or so players per league to tryout at a cost of 30 or more dollars per player. It's like applying for a job that you don't know what the credentials are, you have to wait a year and there are 30 applicants applying on the same day that all have to pay. What if you are sick or injured on that day? But it's even worse than that, if some how you are selected for the league, now you will have to come up with some serious money to participate. Those in the power claim that a player will never be rejected because of money, well that is a nice thing to say but in reality, it does not happen, if you get selected you pay. It is a for profit system that pays coaches, technical directors etc. So .... my opinion and the opinion of most is ........ tryouts are a mess.
Roster Sizes.
They should be sufficient to field a team with a number of spares. If you can not field a team, there should be a forfeit and the club officials should be involved.
Playing Time.
I feel that if an equal playing time rule were to be implemented,
All Canadian youth soccer players at the amateur level would benefit from this immensely. (including Gold, Metro, HPL and Provincial).

The only exception to the rule would be discipline based or sickness/injury based.
Discipline would be things like not showing up for practice, bad behavior, rough play, unsportsmanlike conduct etc.

Those that use the limiting playing time philosophy have their reasons.
They will say things that are punishment based such as, If you don't prove yourself as an effective player then you will not play!
That theory is based on improving a player during training and then rewarding the player by allowing playing time during a match.
This of course this comes with performance expectations, the player must prove their skills.
Other situations may occur during matches, an example may be, I am pulling you off as a player for being slow or incompetent.
The process of benching players is loosely based upon the concept that playing time is earned, or statements like ... it's unfair to the teammates, they are better than you or try harder. It has been said ....... better players deserve more playing time and matches are supposed to be won not lost.

The "old school" proponents of benching youth or amateur players as an effective motivator are facing a dramatically changing environment.
Today all proficient soccer nations are now developing players differently than even the past 5 or 10 years. The focus is on producing greater numbers of proficient players and keeping those players in the game. The changes are rapid but relatively simple, the now outdated training concepts have been replaced with proven and successful systems.

Let's look at reality, at the youth level, nobody is getting paid as a pro player. Winning or losing is not going to cost anybody a penny. Amateur teams should not be treated like pro teams. A pro team has reserve players that are paid and benched every match. Those teams have a job that is reliant on winning matches. The intent and purpose is to extend their playing season into championship extended seasons. Money is important not only to those players but to all the supporting occupations as well. Some people have it in their mind that we should emulate this behavior in the youth system making things competitive and rewarding. At the youth level it's simple, really simple, if you want to improve your players, you do not sit them on the bench. All students deserve equal opportunity for education and players need to learn by playing the game.There are too many coaches that need their team to win, even if it is at the detriment of their own benched players. Any way you look at it, a benched player will suffer. In most cases negative and long lasting impacts of such actions are imminent. Performance anxiety, Confidence and resentment all manifest themselves in different ways. It is a proven fact that when players are given opportunities to learn playing in official match, they improve. The reward for player improvement is far greater than the overall risk of a possible match loss.

John McKay

Some very good points.

 

[4_the_kids]

So reading through everything we all seem to agree on the following:
We need more accountability, more transparency , more openness, more parent education, and need to improve coaching standards,
These pretty much summarize the issue starting at Canada soccer. You can't hold players accountable until parents are, can;t hold parents until coaches are, can't hold coaches until clubs are, can't hold club until districts are , can't hold districts until provincial are, and can't hold provincial until national is. The recent CCB mess is a good example of this.
We have a top down problem that is trying to be solved from the bottom up, largely cause there is a lack of faith in the top changing andno faith their leadership.
Ironically I follow a group of coaches from the UK on twitter and they complain of very similar issues there, only major difference is there are way more private academies and way more money at those academy levels, but the academies are killing the grassroots. You can this starting here as well with Roman Tullis, ,TSS , Whitecaps, and many others ... same has happened in local hockey
Until the adults grow up( executives, coaches and parents alike) , I am not sure much ever changes, but I am all for trying. ...
Let's keep the discussion going...

 

[Tom Duley]

So reading through everything we all seem to agree on the following:
We need more accountability, more transparency , more openness, more parent education, and need to improve coaching standards,
These pretty much summarize the issue starting at Canada soccer. You can't hold players accountable until parents are, can;t hold parents until coaches are, can't hold coaches until clubs are, can't hold club until districts are , can't hold districts until provincial are, and can't hold provincial until national is. The recent CCB mess is a good example of this.
We have a top down problem that is trying to be solved from the bottom up, largely cause there is a lack of faith in the top changing andno faith their leadership.
Ironically I follow a group of coaches from the UK on twitter and they complain of very similar issues there, only major difference is there are way more private academies and way more money at those academy levels, but the academies are killing the grassroots. You can this starting here as well with Roman Tullis, ,TSS , Whitecaps, and many others ... same has happened in local hockey
Until the adults grow up( executives, coaches and parents alike) , I am not sure much ever changes, but I am all for trying. ...
Let's keep the discussion going...

hahaha...I like'd your chain of (lack of) accountability.

I was lucky in my life, I was exposed to and experienced amazing coaching...which is why now today, I enjoy the challenge of seeing the good side of all kids and helping they be relevant in the sport, improve their overall game and teach them to be good team players. I have several kids that have experienced my coaching but no longer are on my team and have requested they attend my training sessions, the problem is, I don't have enough field space and time...3 days a week for training (one of those days is 4v4) and a game on the weekend.

To your point about accountability. At our club, we have one very accountable person and the rest do nothing but talk but make little changes that better the development program. You mentioned the part about holding people accountable and yet at my club, we have people that have the knowledge and are willing to give their time to help coaches, coach...and not a single person with the authority will connect the dots and offer assistance to those that need it....so the vicious circle of getting crappy coaching and starting off a kids soccer experience in a baby-sitters atmosphere rather than a soccer culture will not change.

There are times when I literally hear my own jaw hit the floor when I look over and see just how ridiculous a practice is run. No structure, no plan, no order...its a 3 ring circus and the kids run the show. Some parents that are immigrants get very angry at the lack of structure and eventually leave....

I'm not sure if Vic Montaglinai knows or cares, Mike Findlay was a complete joke when he was head of BC Soccer, who in their right mind could ever believe he's the assistant coach to our senior mens team? A total slap in the face to the sport and a mockery to soccer lovers...the guy must feel like he's on vacation every time he steps on the training pitch cause I know for fact, he is clueless...and unfortunately I have to admit the same for my old buddy Vic M...our current president....they are shaming us by placing their friends from Columbus FC into several positions throughout BC Soccer and the White Caps Academy....we are lower than 3rd World countries in this sport, we behave as minnows, allow clueless people to make decisions and then wonder why we don't ask our kids to be accountable, why should they be when there is no accountability from the top down!

 

[4_the_kids]

hahaha...I like'd your chain of (lack of) accountability.

I was lucky in my life, I was exposed to and experienced amazing coaching...which is why now today, I enjoy the challenge of seeing the good side of all kids and helping they be relevant in the sport, improve their overall game and teach them to be good team players. I have several kids that have experienced my coaching but no longer are on my team and have requested they attend my training sessions, the problem is, I don't have enough field space and time...3 days a week for training (one of those days is 4v4) and a game on the weekend.

To your point about accountability. At our club, we have one very accountable person and the rest do nothing but talk but make little changes that better the development program. You mentioned the part about holding people accountable and yet at my club, we have people that have the knowledge and are willing to give their time to help coaches, coach...and not a single person with the authority will connect the dots and offer assistance to those that need it....so the vicious circle of getting crappy coaching and starting off a kids soccer experience in a baby-sitters atmosphere rather than a soccer culture will not change.

There are times when I literally hear my own jaw hit the floor when I look over and see just how ridiculous a practice is run. No structure, no plan, no order...its a 3 ring circus and the kids run the show. Some parents that are immigrants get very angry at the lack of structure and eventually leave....

I'm not sure if Vic Montaglinai knows or cares, Mike Findlay was a complete joke when he was head of BC Soccer, who in their right mind could ever believe he's the assistant coach to our senior mens team? A total slap in the face to the sport and a mockery to soccer lovers...the guy must feel like he's on vacation every time he steps on the training pitch cause I know for fact, he is clueless...and unfortunately I have to admit the same for my old buddy Vic M...our current president....they are shaming us by placing their friends from Columbus FC into several positions throughout BC Soccer and the White Caps Academy....we are lower than 3rd World countries in this sport, we behave as minnows, allow clueless people to make decisions and then wonder why we don't ask our kids to be accountable, why should they be when there is no accountability from the top down!

Well put!!!
One day it will change , in the mean time keep giving the kids you coach a positive experience that lasts a life time. A true test of a great coach isn't how many wins, championships, trophies or how many kids move on to higher levels its how many come back to give back what they experienced.

 

[Tom Duley]

Well put!!!
One day it will change , in the mean time keep giving the kids you coach a positive experience that lasts a life time. A true test of a great coach isn't how many wins, championships, trophies or how many kids move on to higher levels its how many come back to give back what they experienced.

I think the true test of a coach is how you can help kids learn to work, achieve and then believe they have the abilities...as long as they can apply themselves.

I do have a very good winning record over the past few years but it has never been a priority. When we work hard, be accountable to each other and give it our best, who cares how the result will end up....but chances are the result will be good. None of my teams have ever lost a game by more than 2 goals, we aren't and haven't been gifted in the scoring department either, but nobody beats us without knowing they are in a hard fought match...even this year when we played the highest scoring team in the league, they score 1 goal against us and won 1-0...and I was very satisfied with the result...it was a bad goal but an excellent effort.

We as coaches, have a good opportunity to influence kids and I fully agree, we have to make a positive impact. This is why I expect more from those kids that are just by-standers when there are 20 others that would love the opportunity to be in their place!

 

[WTF]

If you read my post you would have seen a comment similar to "unless there are behaviour issues." If a kid half-arsing it....no playing time or very little. But you have to be open and honest with everyone from day 1 about this, and then communicate with the player before reducing their time. They have to know and understand why they aren't getting time. They have to know and understand what to do to get the playing time back or earn even more. It's not difficult.

Good points TKBC , any experienced coach should be fully aware about behavioral issues/discipline etc and obviously take steps to take care of that. BC Soccer has set a 30 % playing time for the BCSPL [ prob only 10% of youth players in BC ] over the season . It would do no harm to set a minimum time for the other Youth leages as well where 90% of players play .

 

[TKBC]

Good points TKBC , any experienced coach should be fully aware about behavioral issues/discipline etc and obviously take steps to take care of that. BC Soccer has set a 30 % playing time for the BCSPL [ prob only 10% of youth players in BC ] over the season . It would do no harm to set a minimum time for the other Youth leages as well where 90% of players play .

I agree - but for levels below BCSPL should be "50% except if injured, ill, or behaviour issues" - actually, considering the time and financial commitment, getting kids 50% at BCSPL level shouldn't be a stretch either....

 

[Tom Duley]

I agree - but for levels below BCSPL should be "50% except if injured, ill, or behaviour issues" - actually, considering the time and financial commitment, getting kids 50% at BCSPL level shouldn't be a stretch either....

Can I ask why you think everyone should get 50%?

What type of compete level do you think there would be if you offer everyone equal time?

I'm not trying to be disrespectful but don't you think there has to be an element of earned time?

 

[4_the_kids]

Can I ask why you think everyone should get 50%?

What type of compete level do you think there would be if you offer everyone equal time?

I'm not trying to be disrespectful but don't you think there has to be an element of earned time?

Not speaking for TKBC , but for myself I think the point is we are looking for direction from BC Soccer , there are too many coaches who abuse the earned time theory, and you see it all levels, when a mini player, or house , or even MSL player who puts in an effort is playing 10 mins a game at best its wrong, they pay to play and should be given the opportunity to play. This is recreational soccer
BCSPL is the only level to be considered ELITE and if they can have a min 30% playing time rule surely ALL levels below can adapt something similar.
I agree kids with no effort, who don't show up don't deserve the right to play - that should be dealt with on a case by case basis, really that kid probably doesn't want to play he is only playing cause his parents put him there or to hang out with friends. I have a few like that, and they generally don't start games and probably play a little less than those who show up and put in the effort, I made that clear from Day 1 and the parents were in agreement.
The other theory is if the coach doesn't trust a player to put him in all situations and they are playing MSL through to Div 3 the issue is in the selection process not playing time. That player doesn't belong at that level. And its doing the play a disservice having them there, regardless of why he is there ( coaches kids, played with team for long time , etc...)
I don't think its unrealistic to strive for 30-50% playing time, disciplinary reasons aside. Also not measured on a per game basis but as total playing time over the season, which allows for the disciplinary benching.

 

[Tom Duley]

Not speaking for TKBC , but for myself I think the point is we are looking for direction from BC Soccer , there are too many coaches who abuse the earned time theory, and you see it all levels, when a mini player, or house , or even MSL player who puts in an effort is playing 10 mins a game at best its wrong, they pay to play and should be given the opportunity to play. This is recreational soccer
BCSPL is the only level to be considered ELITE and if they can have a min 30% playing time rule surely ALL levels below can adapt something similar.
I agree kids with no effort, who don't show up don't deserve the right to play - that should be dealt with on a case by case basis, really that kid probably doesn't want to play he is only playing cause his parents put him there or to hang out with friends. I have a few like that, and they generally don't start games and probably play a little less than those who show up and put in the effort, I made that clear from Day 1 and the parents were in agreement.
The other theory is if the coach doesn't trust a player to put him in all situations and they are playing MSL through to Div 3 the issue is in the selection process not playing time. That player doesn't belong at that level. And its doing the play a disservice having them there, regardless of why he is there ( coaches kids, played with team for long time , etc...)
I don't think its unrealistic to strive for 30-50% playing time, disciplinary reasons aside. Also not measured on a per game basis but as total playing time over the season, which allows for the disciplinary benching.

I guess we all see this through our own experience's. I for one, have started my coaching at the house level (U10) and through my personal experience felt that many of those boys weren't capable of competing, they were just used to be coached by someone that utilized the stronger players and didn't teach many of them how to be better and more effective players. When I took over that team a few years back, I treated them as if they were MSL players...having structured practices, providing physical training (running, sit-ups, push-ups...), technical training (all skills, combinations, repetition...) and then teaching them how to defend and attack. Every kid has THIS ability to learn and give their effort, it is undeniable and cannot be argued....some pay more attention than others but once the ground rules are set and the parents are told what the expectations are (listen, effort, focus), everything else is fun!

When you then progress (you will 100% progress if you treat them and train them like players and not a baby-sitter), the real difference between the boys shouldn't be based on how many goals one scores over another or who has a better shot, cross or pass....as along as they are trying to play as we practised and as long as their effort is there, I agree, everyone gets equal playing time but that is not always the case so with that said, we have to include a system where everyone has the opportunity to be rewarded and those that are there just because their parents want them out of the house will not necessarily play as much.

I think the important thing some here might be missing is that we are forgetting about the "house" kids and "div.2" kids as well. Why? Why shouldn't they have the opportunity to excel from the U10 age to the U13 or U14 ages? I've developed kids that were in house 3 years ago and at least 6 of them can comfortably play in div 1 (4 already do) and I believe 3 can easily play at the MSL level. My point in this discussion is that if I didn't allow them to excel, because I gave the same amount of playing time to them as I did to a kid that had no interest in competing, they'd never have gained the confidence or learned the "will to compete" while on the other hand I have parents that won't do the right thing and take their kid down a level (and allow me to bring a kid up a level), because they know the kid will most likely feel embarrassed amongst his friends.

This is anti-soccer culture. If we are all invested in coaching and saying we want to develop kids, we should be looking at those who invest themselves and not always rely on the most talented. Look at the make-up of a team and think to yourselves...how many players out of 10 (not counting the goalie) are role players? How many are play-makers? How many are goal-scorers? Role players are important and yet, we overlook them all the time and allow them to go down a level or two and they become lost and forgotten...I'd rather take those kids that want to play and work hard over those that think they "deserve" 50% when in fact, they hardly give 50% to their team...and we all preach that the team comes first...right?

 

[4_the_kids]

I guess we all see this through our own experience's. I for one, have started my coaching at the house level (U10) and through my personal experience felt that many of those boys weren't capable of competing, they were just used to be coached by someone that utilized the stronger players and didn't teach many of them how to be better and more effective players. When I took over that team a few years back, I treated them as if they were MSL players...having structured practices, providing physical training (running, sit-ups, push-ups...), technical training (all skills, combinations, repetition...) and then teaching them how to defend and attack. Every kid has THIS ability to learn and give their effort, it is undeniable and cannot be argued....some pay more attention than others but once the ground rules are set and the parents are told what the expectations are (listen, effort, focus), everything else is fun!

When you then progress (you will 100% progress if you treat them and train them like players and not a baby-sitter), the real difference between the boys shouldn't be based on how many goals one scores over another or who has a better shot, cross or pass....as along as they are trying to play as we practised and as long as their effort is there, I agree, everyone gets equal playing time but that is not always the case so with that said, we have to include a system where everyone has the opportunity to be rewarded and those that are there just because their parents want them out of the house will not necessarily play as much.

I think the important thing some here might be missing is that we are forgetting about the "house" kids and "div.2" kids as well. Why? Why shouldn't they have the opportunity to excel from the U10 age to the U13 or U14 ages? I've developed kids that were in house 3 years ago and at least 6 of them can comfortably play in div 1 (4 already do) and I believe 3 can easily play at the MSL level. My point in this discussion is that if I didn't allow them to excel, because I gave the same amount of playing time to them as I did to a kid that had no interest in competing, they'd never have gained the confidence or learned the "will to compete" while on the other hand I have parents that won't do the right thing and take their kid down a level (and allow me to bring a kid up a level), because they know the kid will most likely feel embarrassed amongst his friends.

This is anti-soccer culture. If we are all invested in coaching and saying we want to develop kids, we should be looking at those who invest themselves and not always rely on the most talented. Look at the make-up of a team and think to yourselves...how many players out of 10 (not counting the goalie) are role players? How many are play-makers? How many are goal-scorers? Role players are important and yet, we overlook them all the time and allow them to go down a level or two and they become lost and forgotten...I'd rather take those kids that want to play and work hard over those that think they "deserve" 50% when in fact, they hardly give 50% to their team...and we all preach that the team comes first...right?

I agree with 90% of what you are saying, I use a very similar philosophy, I have been coaching for 7 years started at U6 , coached house, to Div1. Many kids are under developed and can be brought up with the right coaching and environment. I took over a Div 2 team that had poor coaching, kids not playing or playing very little, previous coach was a win first type coach and when that didn't work he just tried to score a couple goals to give the parents something to cheer about in a 8-2 loss., it was horrible. NOw this team plays Div1 competitively and players once being benched by getting fair playing time are now some of the best players. Kids also need to play to improve , that doesn't only happen in training especially at younger ages as the play the sport to play the games...It is amazing how much you can improve or destroy confidence in how you allocate playing time.

 

[Tom Duley]

I agree with 90% of what you are saying, I use a very similar philosophy, I have been coaching for 7 years started at U6 , coached house, to Div1. Many kids are under developed and can be brought up with the right coaching and environment. I took over a Div 2 team that had poor coaching, kids not playing or playing very little, previous coach was a win first type coach and when that didn't work he just tried to score a couple goals to give the parents something to cheer about in a 8-2 loss., it was horrible. NOw this team plays Div1 competitively and players once being benched by getting fair playing time are now some of the best players. Kids also need to play to improve , that doesn't only happen in training especially at younger ages as the play the sport to play the games...It is amazing how much you can improve or destroy confidence in how you allocate playing time.

...and there is where we are all a bit confused. how do you allocate playing time? I am and have been a firm believer in helping all the kids, don't look at their overall skills as the #1 asset, look at their demeanour during practices and games. afford them time and speak to them regularly, help improve their skills, effectiveness, awareness and always keep in mind that we can help them improve but I guess I am just stuck on one kid that has affected not only me, but his team-mates as well. and in this case, I just have a really hard time with offering him more le-way...his parents have made things harder by them not helping me help him and he knows they support him, even though his effort level is FAR lower than everyone else on my team.

I had kids that were behind him in April and are now far more effective than he is. his dad said the other day that he knew his son should most likely be playing down a level but he doesn't want to risk him not getting the coaching he is getting now.

 

[4_the_kids]

...and there is where we are all a bit confused. how do you allocate playing time? I am and have been a firm believer in helping all the kids, don't look at their overall skills as the #1 asset, look at their demeanour during practices and games. afford them time and speak to them regularly, help improve their skills, effectiveness, awareness and always keep in mind that we can help them improve but I guess I am just stuck on one kid that has affected not only me, but his team-mates as well. and in this case, I just have a really hard time with offering him more le-way...his parents have made things harder by them not helping me help him and he knows they support him, even though his effort level is FAR lower than everyone else on my team.

I had kids that were behind him in April and are now far more effective than he is. his dad said the other day that he knew his son should most likely be playing down a level but he doesn't want to risk him not getting the coaching he is getting now.

Perhaps allocate is the wrong word, simply put I try to play everyone 50% of the game , it doesn't always work out.I have 5 subs we play 30 min halves i sub every ten minutes,if you had poor effort or no show during the training sessions you don't start and only play 10 mins in the first half.Sometimes in close games I loose track of the time and the last substitution of the game might get less time, if i had a player you speak off they certainly would only get the 10 mins per half, if game effort was good they might get the extra 10 mins in the second half. ... I try not to focus on the win but in the how we played instead. You have a unique situation that is a bit of a one off, it needs addressing and i would have no issues with this player loosing playing time as a consequence to his chosen effort as long as that has been made clear to him.

 

[Tom Duley]

Perhaps allocate is the wrong word, simply put I try to play everyone 50% of the game , it doesn't always work out.I have 5 subs we play 30 min halves i sub every ten minutes,if you had poor effort or no show during the training sessions you don't start and only play 10 mins in the first half.Sometimes in close games I loose track of the time and the last substitution of the game might get less time, if i had a player you speak off they certainly would only get the 10 mins per half, if game effort was good they might get the extra 10 mins in the second half. ... I try not to focus on the win but in the how we played instead. You have a unique situation that is a bit of a one off, it needs addressing and i would have no issues with this player loosing playing time as a consequence to his chosen effort as long as that has been made clear to him.

This is a case of 1 player and not exerting himself EVER, which has caused me a lot of grief.

I have another question for you. why do you use the "sub every ten minutes" rule on your team? I'm not challenging you and saying it is wrong, I've never used it and in my own mind/logic, I think it can be counter-productive...just my opinion.

Throughout the game, we see many different situations, players react different this week that they did last week, the opponents are different, the style of game might be different, the quality of the team or game might be different...why keep the subs the same?

I usually look for what part of the game may need an adjustment or what player may need to come off so we can have a quick 2 minute discussion on positioning or his lack of engaging. If we start good and things are going in our favor, why disrupt the flow and if things aren't going so well, change the position that needs some attention....but why change 3 or more players? doesn't that just justify the model that they are all equal and we aren't changing based on improvement or learning? I know that once in a while we have to make changes for the sake of time but why sub every 10....last game I subbed my two best players after 7 minutes, neither were aware of their positioning and both usually get to play 90% of the game. when i made the change, one of the subs was also having a difficult time with positioning and man marking and although he was holding his own, I made sure he made adjustments during the game so he could be more successful at defending and I didn't go down any goals...why not address the issues immediately and hopefully the correction is made and we can focus on the next task...ie...creating more chances, pressing the opponents...

please don't take this as an attack, I just find that when I did try that approach, I was not coaching, I was managing the clock!

 

[4_the_kids]

This is a case of 1 player and not exerting himself EVER, which has caused me a lot of grief.

I have another question for you. why do you use the "sub every ten minutes" rule on your team? I'm not challenging you and saying it is wrong, I've never used it and in my own mind/logic, I think it can be counter-productive...just my opinion.

Throughout the game, we see many different situations, players react different this week that they did last week, the opponents are different, the style of game might be different, the quality of the team or game might be different...why keep the subs the same?

I usually look for what part of the game may need an adjustment or what player may need to come off so we can have a quick 2 minute discussion on positioning or his lack of engaging. If we start good and things are going in our favor, why disrupt the flow and if things aren't going so well, change the position that needs some attention....but why change 3 or more players? doesn't that just justify the model that they are all equal and we aren't changing based on improvement or learning? I know that once in a while we have to make changes for the sake of time but why sub every 10....last game I subbed my two best players after 7 minutes, neither were aware of their positioning and both usually get to play 90% of the game. when i made the change, one of the subs was also having a difficult time with positioning and man marking and although he was holding his own, I made sure he made adjustments during the game so he could be more successful at defending and I didn't go down any goals...why not address the issues immediately and hopefully the correction is made and we can focus on the next task...ie...creating more chances, pressing the opponents...

please don't take this as an attack, I just find that when I did try that approach, I was not coaching, I was managing the clock!

How do the players who don't get to play ever learn or develop? Yes the good players benefit but what about the rest? . Simply put I try to use equal playing time, because its U12 and rule is equal playing time. Its not an exact science, i have 5 subs to rotate on and off the field in a 8V8 game and in my case they all deserve the playing time., and there is no real change or drop in play with the subs. Sometimes its every ten minutes, sometimes a bit sooner or later, sometimes if one payer is really struggling i will sub 1 can earlier. And it seems most teams we play against do the same,. I have seen some that do all their subs at half time, seen that even in BCSPL ... all 4-6 of their subs at half . ..My objective is to develop the players, practice is great for learning technique or refining it, but player need game time to develop skill ( skill being the art of using technique under pressure) practice scrimmages just doesn't duplicate a game. Player need game time, the need to be able to make mistakes without fear of being subbed off.

For the record I am horrible at managing the clock , I try but often get lost in the game

Observation : it really seems you are coaching for success or best possible result vs coaching for player development - perhaps justified at your age and level , not sure...and if winning mattered for us I would do the same, but other than bragging rights winning doesn't mean anything for us. Developing and learning to play the game is our focus.