Youth Soccer - Tryouts/Rosters/Minimum Playing Time etc

[Tom Duley]

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.

"it really seems you are coaching for success or best possible result vs coaching for player development"...my players from house a few years back are the best players on their Div 2 team and the 4 I took to my team this year (two more could have easily made it...that's 8 out of 11 kids) are the best on our Div 1 team....I coach to develop but also to encourage a high work rate and compete level.

I think I've said enough about this topic, I get the impression you might feel uncomfortable with the word "compete" while I think its healthy and offers a good and strong foundation to their future's...in all aspects.

I coached U12 last year and for various reasons took the Div 2B team. the guy that had the Div 2A team created a mess for me this year...he never challenged his kids and he made sure all parents were happy and rah rah...I watched 4 of his games...all of them losses, all by huge margins and yet, Mr Rah rah had something positive to pull out from every loss. fast forward to this year where I now have 4 or 5 of his kids on my team...it was a nightmare coaching kids that were far worse than mine from a lower level.

Here's the kicker....the parents of the boys he coached all blame him now (in hindsight) for not coaching with some level of accountability and competitiveness...they all feel their boys lost a year to having fun but not developing....which is why I initially said when I got my boys in April, we were a nightmare and I really did have my work cut out for me....their coach last season was fun and evenly balanced and didn't include an element of compete...like they do in every successful soccer Nation on earth. Now, every kid (except that one) has learned to work and contribute....and guess what....the parents started out apprehensive and nervous...they had never seen anyone raise their voice at their kid, nobody held them accountable, nobody ever spent 3 practice days/week during the Spring (April-Jun) and then 3 days/week training in August, just to help prepare their boys...and now these parents have relaxed and accepted their kids are capable of playing position, completing their assignments, competing for the ball and playing as a team-mate. How much confidence do you think these kids have now? two weekends ago we had a bye and an MSL team asked for an exhibition...we accepted...we won....who was more happy than the kids or me....right...the parents....they now see their little angels being accountable!

 

[4_the_kids]

"it really seems you are coaching for success or best possible result vs coaching for player development"...my players from house a few years back are the best players on their Div 2 team and the 4 I took to my team this year (two more could have easily made it...that's 8 out of 11 kids) are the best on our Div 1 team....I coach to develop but also to encourage a high work rate and compete level.

I think I've said enough about this topic, I get the impression you might feel uncomfortable with the word "compete" while I think its healthy and offers a good and strong foundation to their future's...in all aspects.

I coached U12 last year and for various reasons took the Div 2B team. the guy that had the Div 2A team created a mess for me this year...he never challenged his kids and he made sure all parents were happy and rah rah...I watched 4 of his games...all of them losses, all by huge margins and yet, Mr Rah rah had something positive to pull out from every loss. fast forward to this year where I now have 4 or 5 of his kids on my team...it was a nightmare coaching kids that were far worse than mine from a lower level.

Here's the kicker....the parents of the boys he coached all blame him now (in hindsight) for not coaching with some level of accountability and competitiveness...they all feel their boys lost a year to having fun but not developing....which is why I initially said when I got my boys in April, we were a nightmare and I really did have my work cut out for me....their coach last season was fun and evenly balanced and didn't include an element of compete...like they do in every successful soccer Nation on earth. Now, every kid (except that one) has learned to work and contribute....and guess what....the parents started out apprehensive and nervous...they had never seen anyone raise their voice at their kid, nobody held them accountable, nobody ever spent 3 practice days/week during the Spring (April-Jun) and then 3 days/week training in August, just to help prepare their boys...and now these parents have relaxed and accepted their kids are capable of playing position, completing their assignments, competing for the ball and playing as a team-mate. How much confidence do you think these kids have now? two weekends ago we had a bye and an MSL team asked for an exhibition...we accepted...we won....who was more happy than the kids or me....right...the parents....they now see their little angels being accountable!

I just don't see the connection to being accountable and playing time outside of disciplinary reasons. I agree with almost all you say but you leave me with the impression there are kids on your team who are lucky to see 10 mins a game . If all but one are accountable why don't they all have equal playing time?

The one i agree with , i would just force his hand ... but the rest?
How may subs to you have ? How much playing time do they get?
Natural Competition is healthy , competition created by adults is for the adults not the kids. There is a balance perhaps you have found it...

My kids are all challenged, and competitive. We are currently a Div 3 team,i left my old team and took this team on this year, previous coach was a super positive rah rah type as well, but lacked development ( 12 of 13 could only juggle 2 to 3 times) , parent feedback is the boys are are having more fun cause they are learning and being challenged. I came from a super competitive environment created by the parents that was destroying the boys, kids getting paid to score and stuff.. awful stuff. And i can say this much, for the first time in years my son is enjoying the game again, even if hes playing at a lower level than he deserves.
Now some of the boys are Div 3 players and will be because they are not committed to improving or their parents are not committed to the sport beyond recreation, they still try hard and give an honest effort though. I expect 6 to 8 of my players will be challenging for spots on the higher teams next year as their skill and compete has improved in just two months .

 

[Tom Duley]

I just don't see the connection to being accountable and playing time outside of disciplinary reasons. I agree with almost all you say but you leave me with the impression there are kids on your team who are lucky to see 10 mins a game . If all but one are accountable why don't they all have equal playing time?

The one i agree with , i would just force his hand ... but the rest?
How may subs to you have ? How much playing time do they get?
Natural Competition is healthy , competition created by adults is for the adults not the kids. There is a balance perhaps you have found it...

My kids are all challenged, and competitive. We are currently a Div 3 team,i left my old team and took this team on this year, previous coach was a super positive rah rah type as well, but lacked development ( 12 of 13 could only juggle 2 to 3 times) , parent feedback is the boys are are having more fun cause they are learning and being challenged. I came from a super competitive environment created by the parents that was destroying the boys, kids getting paid to score and stuff.. awful stuff. And i can say this much, for the first time in years my son is enjoying the game again, even if hes playing at a lower level than he deserves.
Now some of the boys are Div 3 players and will be because they are not committed to improving or their parents are not committed to the sport beyond recreation, they still try hard and give an honest effort though. I expect 6 to 8 of my players will be challenging for spots on the higher teams next year as their skill and compete has improved in just two months .

everyone gets a minimum of 25-30 minutes...there is always the exception but for the most part, they all get their minimum.

at U13, the rule says 30% over the course of the year...so you can spread it out but regardless, I try to always give at least 25. NOW, the great thing about my rule is that many have gone from 25 up to 50...or even more at times...so guess how competitive my practices are? its not easy to make subs anymore....I used to just know that these were weaker and those were more reliable....NOW, almost every kid is very reliable consistently and even though I have 16 out of 17 kids that played in Div 2 last year and we are in Div 1 this year, we are at the top of the pack and every week kids beg their parents to bring them to practice, even if they're sick or to miss a hockey game because they want to play soccer.

it is fun, especially when you, as a kid, know you're improving and contributing. like I said earlier, I have kids parents from my last years team asking if they can practice with us...last night I had one extra, on Tuesday I had two but cannot continue to do it because of the lack of field space.

getting paid to score is not productive....saving a breakaway, assisting a goal, making a good pass, helping your team-mate cover his check, making encouraging and positive comments, sacrificing yourself for the team....these are all productive.

we have different ways of viewing a team structure but I don't see anything wrong with how you coach. the parents I coach like my style...not sure why you think I'm unfair?

 

[4_the_kids]

everyone gets a minimum of 25-30 minutes...there is always the exception but for the most part, they all get their minimum.

at U13, the rule says 30% over the course of the year...so you can spread it out but regardless, I try to always give at least 25. NOW, the great thing about my rule is that many have gone from 25 up to 50...or even more at times...so guess how competitive my practices are? its not easy to make subs anymore....I used to just know that these were weaker and those were more reliable....NOW, almost every kid is very reliable consistently and even though I have 16 out of 17 kids that played in Div 2 last year and we are in Div 1 this year, we are at the top of the pack and every week kids beg their parents to bring them to practice, even if they're sick or to miss a hockey game because they want to play soccer.

it is fun, especially when you, as a kid, know you're improving and contributing. like I said earlier, I have kids parents from my last years team asking if they can practice with us...last night I had one extra, on Tuesday I had two but cannot continue to do it because of the lack of field space.

getting paid to score is not productive....saving a breakaway, assisting a goal, making a good pass, helping your team-mate cover his check, making encouraging and positive comments, sacrificing yourself for the team....these are all productive.

we have different ways of viewing a team structure but I don't see anything wrong with how you coach. the parents I coach like my style...not sure why you think I'm unfair?

I don't think you are unfair, you left out the how much time min, you are averaging 35% min, which is OK for a div 1 team, I personally would aim for a little more but that is my prerogative. And the kids are having FUN that's great!!

 

[Tom Duley]

I don't think you are unfair, you left out the how much time min, you are averaging 35% min, which is OK for a div 1 team, I personally would aim for a little more but that is my prerogative. And the kids are having FUN that's great!!

...and to me, I really enjoy watching them grow as people, team-mates, friends. I feel really happy for them when they realize their own personal and team achievements...ie...doing a leg raise for 1 minute and 20 seconds, completing 7 consecutive one touch passes in a game, holding each other accountable and also, never blaming anyone and accepting mistakes and move on....

I think the kids on my team understand they have strengths and weaknesses and since the first day, everyone has their equal place and equal role on our team....we don't have 1 player everyone can point to and say he is the most valuable or favourable because we've always praised effort/work rate...as we all know each kids contributions are all different but they are all equally valuable!

team first...no-one is bigger than the team!

 

[SU Coach]

I'm jumping in at the end of this discussion guys, but I will say that I think there could be different rules for different levels of play. I coach a U12 house team....I do not see any way, other than for disiplinary reasons, I could, or should, play any one player more or less than the others over the course of the season (like 4_the_kids does, I sub every 10 minutes, with 5 subs....most games 6 players will play 30 minutes while the others will play 40. The next week it will be switched around...I monitor this fastidiously). The 14 kids that I have all paid the same amount of money and all went through exactly the same level of trials to make it on my team....none. When that is the case, I don't think it is right to allocate time based on anything other than straight equality.
That said, once you start having tryouts for teams, a higher standard can be applied...perhaps at the level above ours you would still stick to a 50% target, but rather than simply substituting because it is time, maybe each week merit has some consideration. The higher you go, the greater that standard can be, though at any level except the highest I still don't think the target over the course of a season should be any less than 50%. I also don't undestand why any parent would accept a situation where their child is playing less than 50%.
Of course, at each successive level there are always kids ready to move up...there is nothing saying that you have to take the same kids next year...if you have a player that did not meet your standards for behaviour/effort/performance...don't pick him next year. But I don't get to make that choice...I get the kids I am given, no matter what baggage they bring to the field, and I have no chance to change them. My job, as a house coach, is to teach them what I can, and make sure that they keep coming back. I am very successful at that...I have coached Ball Hockey, Softball and Soccer and I have a very high return rate. We don't always win, but we progress, we work as a team, we experience success or failure as a team, and we have fun. And then they all come back to do it again.

 

[Tom Duley]

I'm jumping in at the end of this discussion guys, but I will say that I think there could be different rules for different levels of play. I coach a U12 house team....I do not see any way, other than for disiplinary reasons, I could, or should, play any one player more or less than the others over the course of the season (like 4_the_kids does, I sub every 10 minutes, with 5 subs....most games 6 players will play 30 minutes while the others will play 40. The next week it will be switched around...I monitor this fastidiously). The 14 kids that I have all paid the same amount of money and all went through exactly the same level of trials to make it on my team....none. When that is the case, I don't think it is right to allocate time based on anything other than straight equality.
That said, once you start having tryouts for teams, a higher standard can be applied...perhaps at the level above ours you would still stick to a 50% target, but rather than simply substituting because it is time, maybe each week merit has some consideration. The higher you go, the greater that standard can be, though at any level except the highest I still don't think the target over the course of a season should be any less than 50%. I also don't undestand why any parent would accept a situation where their child is playing less than 50%.
Of course, at each successive level there are always kids ready to move up...there is nothing saying that you have to take the same kids next year...if you have a player that did not meet your standards for behaviour/effort/performance...don't pick him next year. But I don't get to make that choice...I get the kids I am given, no matter what baggage they bring to the field, and I have no chance to change them. My job, as a house coach, is to teach them what I can, and make sure that they keep coming back. I am very successful at that...I have coached Ball Hockey, Softball and Soccer and I have a very high return rate. We don't always win, but we progress, we work as a team, we experience success or failure as a team, and we have fun. And then they all come back to do it again.

yeah...house is a bit different and when I coached house, I knew I had to ensure everyone played a half and they always did. I kept 11 players for 7 positions + the goalie (I only had one goalie so I was a bit lucky) and if this week little Johnny stepped it up a bit more than usual, he got to experience more playing time while nobody else suffered less playing time, I guess that's really all I was trying to say all along was that I try to promote those that give the extra 10% but not penalize those that didn't.

The Div.1 boys on my team all tried out for the MSL team, so they are aware that there is a system where if you work at trying to exceed, you will be rewarded with the extra time.

I could be wrong and maybe I am just hopeful they bring this attitude in school and in their future jobs but I don't see anything wrong with it. One day reality will kick in and its tougher to accept when you've never been challenged and expect equal everything except the effort you have to offer.

 

[4_the_kids]

I could be wrong and maybe I am just hopeful they bring this attitude in school and in their future jobs but I don't see anything wrong with it. One day reality will kick in and its tougher to accept when you've never been challenged and expect equal everything except the effort you have to offer.

Now isn't that the truth, I fear the entitlement today's youth feel they have. Nothing is for free, you have to earn the right.

 

[Tom Duley]

Now isn't that the truth, I fear the entitlement today's youth feel they have. Nothing is for free, you have to earn the right.

which is why I really love the underdog... and in this sport, there are far too many people that coach kids and aren't qualified enough to help them....so they can get marginally better by field time but the real difference is in the teaching and practising time...then implementing in the games.

house does not and should not mean end of the line for many kids but the hard core facts are that most house teams...at least in the area where I live, are coached by good people...dads/moms...but have little to no knowledge of how to help kids improve, when in fact they will improve if we give them the knowledge and tools.

I'm pretty adamant about my philosophy and I know I see the game and kids in soccer differently than many or most that have had little exposure. we can help create good little players but we have to implement structure, discipline, accountability...and of course...FUN!

 

[WTF]

I'm jumping in at the end of this discussion guys, but I will say that I think there could be different rules for different levels of play. I coach a U12 house team....I do not see any way, other than for disiplinary reasons, I could, or should, play any one player more or less than the others over the course of the season (like 4_the_kids does, I sub every 10 minutes, with 5 subs....most games 6 players will play 30 minutes while the others will play 40. The next week it will be switched around...I monitor this fastidiously). The 14 kids that I have all paid the same amount of money and all went through exactly the same level of trials to make it on my team....none. When that is the case, I don't think it is right to allocate time based on anything other than straight equality.
That said, once you start having tryouts for teams, a higher standard can be applied...perhaps at the level above ours you would still stick to a 50% target, but rather than simply substituting because it is time, maybe each week merit has some consideration. The higher you go, the greater that standard can be, though at any level except the highest I still don't think the target over the course of a season should be any less than 50%. I also don't undestand why any parent would accept a situation where their child is playing less than 50%.
Of course, at each successive level there are always kids ready to move up...there is nothing saying that you have to take the same kids next year...if you have a player that did not meet your standards for behaviour/effort/performance...don't pick him next year. But I don't get to make that choice...I get the kids I am given, no matter what baggage they bring to the field, and I have no chance to change them. My job, as a house coach, is to teach them what I can, and make sure that they keep coming back. I am very successful at that...I have coached Ball Hockey, Softball and Soccer and I have a very high return rate. We don't always win, but we progress, we work as a team, we experience success or failure as a team, and we have fun. And then they all come back to do it again.

Good post SU

 

[easoccer]

House level is recreational. It doesnt matter if you are 100lbs overweight and cant run to save your life. In this divison emphasis should be on fun, being active, and mentoring the kids in being a part of a team. If a kid is sitting for any other reason that for behavioral issues than the coach should rethink his position. People may say that if the game is on the line, blah blah, we need to have our players on. MY point is that by the end of the season, not in any single game, that all the players should have played or at least an effort was made, the same amount of game time. As we go up in levels, the rule can be adjusted abit, but no kid should be sitting for long periods game after game.

Sometimes we get a kid on a higher level team that doesnt fit the mold of the team. You must try to make an effort, not just dump on the kid and bitch to his parent. If you feel a change really needs to be made talk to the technical director. And only if its better for the child and not for yourself.

 

[LFC]

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.
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...

Brilliant points that would help improve and solve many problems and hopefully the likes of BC Soccer , the Leages , Districts and clubs will take note of suggestions like these.

 

[WTF]

House level is recreational. It doesnt matter if you are 100lbs overweight and cant run to save your life. In this divison emphasis should be on fun, being active, and mentoring the kids in being a part of a team. If a kid is sitting for any other reason that for behavioral issues than the coach should rethink his position. People may say that if the game is on the line, blah blah, we need to have our players on. MY point is that by the end of the season, not in any single game, that all the players should have played or at least an effort was made, the same amount of game time. As we go up in levels, the rule can be adjusted abit, but no kid should be sitting for long periods game after game.

Sometimes we get a kid on a higher level team that doesnt fit the mold of the team. You must try to make an effort, not just dump on the kid and bitch to his parent. If you feel a change really needs to be made talk to the technical director. And only if its better for the child and not for yourself.

Evaluations starting this month and continue into April - competition for players will be fierce at NAP .

 

[easoccer]

Players will go in with the team already picked.

 

[LFC]

Players will go in with the team already picked.

easoccer , u surely have experienced everything - full team goes into tryouts and any players that need adding on have already been poached before the tryouts lolllll

 

[easoccer]

Mark my words. Tryouts in newton are nothing more than each club inflating their chests by showing numbers. Thats it. Players are told not to show well so they can play with their friends on their current team and new players are not given a fair shake.

 

[4_the_kids]

Mark my words. Tryouts in newton are nothing more than each club inflating their chests by showing numbers. That is it. Players are told not to show well so they can play with their friends on their current team and new players are not given a fair shake.

exactly, it all goes back to coach and parent controlled not Club controlled.
That said other clubs still have their own politics, most Div 1 and up teams stay the same year over year with the exception of a few players moving in and out. A few key years where teams do change , U10/U11 as most development teams play up and as such start divisional soccer. Teams often change at this points as you have more tires to group players into. the other time is U13 has BCSPL and Metro become tiers above Div 1 , players move a lot as a result and top teams have change overs.
It is hard to make a team from out of club, essentially you have to be a talent that is greater than what already exists within the club, and likely more than just a little greater...
How clubs pick teams is a guess, i don't know how you pick 16 kids out of a group 60-100 like talented players..
Delta Coastal Selects had 100+ kids try out for U13 Metro , Surrey Guildford United had some 70-80 show up yesterday, all to make one team each. I guess that is why the 'selection committees' tend to stick with what is known. There is certain to be disputed selections out of that.... I am glad I don't have that job...

 

[TKBC]

exactly, it all goes back to coach and parent controlled not Club controlled.
That said other clubs still have their own politics, most Div 1 and up teams stay the same year over year with the exception of a few players moving in and out. A few key years where teams do change , U10/U11 as most development teams play up and as such start divisional soccer. Teams often change at this points as you have more tires to group players into. the other time is U13 has BCSPL and Metro become tiers above Div 1 , players move a lot as a result and top teams have change overs.
It is hard to make a team from out of club, essentially you have to be a talent that is greater than what already exists within the club, and likely more than just a little greater...
How clubs pick teams is a guess, i don't know how you pick 16 kids out of a group 60-100 like talented players..
Delta Coastal Selects had 100+ kids try out for U13 Metro , Surrey Guildford United had some 70-80 show up yesterday, all to make one team each. I guess that is why the 'selection committees' tend to stick with what is known. There is certain to be disputed selections out of that.... I am glad I don't have that job...

My question is why you would expect Div 1/Gold teams to have significant roster changes? Unless the MSL/BCSPL team is having a lot of changes, I suppose, I would expect Div 1/Gold teams to remain fairly consistent. The most I have ever had one of my teams change at D1/Gold level was 8 players in one year (this was because it reached the magical age of u17 when most kids quit, and they then combined with the u16 team), but typically it's 3-4 players. D1/Gold is competitive, but rec. Unless, as I said, the MSL/BCSPL roster connected to that D1 team changes a lot the D1 team will remain consistent for the most part.

Having tryouts is good, in some cases. Honestly, Delta Coastal and Surrey Guildford having tryouts is a waste of time - kids can be sick, injured, or nervous. The club may not have enough set of eyes (pro-tip: they WON'T have enough set of eyes). They should be scouting within their club over the course of the league season at MSL/D1 level - and stay in contact with the BCSPL coach to see who the BCSPL coach may be cutting from their team, or wanting to sign from the MSL team.. Tryouts should be limited to "new players" only. Have 2-3 open tryouts with new kids, then have another 2-3 tryouts combining new players with the current players. This way you have can have something like 20-30 kids at a more limited trial competing for the 16-18 spots.

 

[easoccer]

I dont expect roster changes. I expect a club to have integrity. When I watch the tryouts from the sidelines and the d1 coach tells me that he told his players not to show well and the executive director is talking numbers of players over the quality of those in attendance then something is wrong.

 

[4_the_kids]

I don't expect significant change but i do expect change. As it is many clubs are starting development teams at U8 unless you are selected at U8 assume little change in the roster , forget about having any chance in later years?
Kids change, there likes change, there body changes, and as such so should top teams, players drop below standard , players who didn't make it before have improved , etc..

@ TKBC like your idea for tryouts.. Starts perhaps at BCSPL, Surrey United had 70 kids at U13 open tryouts so i am told. so 16-18 make the team that leaves some 52 to go to Metro tryouts, plus another 20-30 that didn't attend BCSPL tryouts or are from other clubs and it easy to see where the large numbers come from.

For U13 as I don't think the numbers are as large after U13... Each partner club to BCSPL should be able to identify 10-12 kids to send to the tryouts,so in the case Of SU that is 10-12 from SU , GAC and LU, there is 36, open tryouts for non partner clubs , say max 30 , trim that down to 10-12 to be invited to main camp. Now up to 48 at main SPL camp ,that becomes 16-18 for BCSPL team, remainder are invited to main Metro camp ( in the case of SU , Langley United and Surrey Guildford United ) so some kids are from Langley they don't come to Surrey Guildford, so say 20-25 kids go to main Metro , then have open tryouts that you pull another 10 -20 from . 2 tryouts with the combined 30-40 kids, with maybe 2 invite only tryouts. Challenge is do clubs have the time and resources to double the tryouts.. either way these larger tryouts with 60+ kids there is no way every kid is being watched, they have an idea who the top 20-30 kids are and those are the kids being watched. Watch how they group the kids and then watch the coaches and you will see a pattern of who is being watched more closely.

back to original point , my main concern is too many kids getting over looked or left behind because they didn't make a top team in U8. There needs to be fluid movement both up and down.... True evals would dissolve current rosters and rebuild them based off results of the eval...and yes good clubs are evaluating year round...so if a kids is sick or out of town they don't get passed on...