Youth Soccer - Tryouts/Rosters/Minimum Playing Time etc

[WTF]

Whats your views on Youth Soccer Tryouts / Roster sizes / Minimum/Equal playing time etc .

I have attended tryouts at most of the clubs in the Surrey area - SU ,Coastal , CCB , SFC and its a real farce what goes on - favouritism by coach,s for certain players [who don,t meet the level of select teams ] , lg roster sizes , players getting very little game time etc .

 

[TKBC]

Up to BCSPL everyone should get 50% playing time minimum. On the squad, paid the fees, get to play. Unless there is illness/injury/behaviour (including attendance) problems.

At BCSPL it should be 50% playing time for u13-15. u16-18 has to be merit-based. I think in all leagues subs should be limited to 3 per half, unlimited at half-time. In this way you avoid the coaches that do give 50% playing time (or near it) but are doing subs every 5 minutes....I played a team last year where the coach was doing subs within 2 minutes of kick off, was subbing with literally 30 seconds left in the game....rubbish. (my players had a good chuckle over that one!)

Once upon a time I thought large squads are good. The last two years my teams have been ravaged with injuries. Now I suggest squads of 14 maximum! Less subs, more playing time! The downside is lack of competition in training and you can very quickly find yourself at 10-11 players for a game leaving you in a position needing to use permits (if available).

Favoritism is a tough call - coaches are going to often select people they know and trust. But the opinion re: favoritism can also be skewed!!

 

[easoccer]

Whats your views on Youth Soccer Tryouts / Roster sizes / Minimum/Equal playing time etc .

I have attended tryouts at most of the clubs in the Surrey area - SU ,Coastal , CCB , SFC and its a real farce what goes on - favouritism by coach,s for certain players [who don,t meet the level of select teams ] , lg roster sizes , players getting very little game time etc .

- I have been to tryouts at GAC, SFC and CCB over the years and I can fully concur with your statement about tryouts.

Last year with all that was happening at CCB they phoned every player directly and invited them to trouts. Even my son. All players who wanted to play GOLD or Metro were required to attend, and if you didnt you would not be allowed to play at that levelk in the fall. Anyway, I attended and I know several GOLD coaches so I talked to them on the bleachers while there. Anyway, they told me they advised their players to show poorly. There were many players missing from the GOLD/Metro teams. All of the rosters were locked in prior to the tryouts. And the tryouts had ZERO bearing on anything. The executives just want to show numbers on the field so they can look like they have a lot of players in the system and to pinch players from one team to a favoured team at lower levels.

The biggest joke about all of this is that if a single Coach doesnt get his way, or loses players to another Gold team, then he can just pack up his bags and move to any other club in the district. So there is no incentive for fairness or equality.

- In regards to playing time, HOUSE and to some extent BRONZE are really the only place that players should be guaranteed 50% playing time NO QUESTIONS ASKED as they are recreational divisions.

If the players play at SILVER or HIGHER, then I feel they should all be selected players. And if done correctly, at evaluations, then it should be a given that the players on the team should all be of equal caliber and by doing this it should be a non issue as the coach should have ZERO reservations about playing all players equally. But that is not the case and players have been coming to ME from gold teams asking to join my team as they get maybe 5 mins a game on their current one. My Roster is full at 18 so there is nothing I can do for them at this time.

- Roster size. From experience I try to keep the maximum amount of players on my roster. At Bronze level there just isnt enough commitment and there are always players missing. 2 years ago in CUP I had 2 players away in india, 1 in pakistan, and others missing for whatever reason. IN CUP. We played with only 9 players in one game.

A better solution for the younger teams are longer games. I think once you go to 11v11 and your roster can carry 18 players, the game length should be a full 45 minutes halves. 30 just isnt enough for 18 players. It definately isnt enough to develop them all properly.

 

[GMW]

Whats your views on Youth Soccer Tryouts / Roster sizes / Minimum/Equal playing time etc .

I have attended tryouts at most of the clubs in the Surrey area - SU ,Coastal , CCB , SFC and its a real farce what goes on - favouritism by coach,s for certain players [who don,t meet the level of select teams ] , lg roster sizes , players getting very little game time etc .

I have attended or been involved with many tryouts in the Vancouver district over the past 20 years and I am afraid that I have to agree with the comments on favoritism and mismanagement of the assessment process. I have observed some clubs where the process has little to no bearing on the final formation of teams, on the other hand some clubs do a fairly good job. Things will improve if we collectively change our mindset and respect the fact that this is about the YOUTH players and not the adult's agendas. The players need to look back on their years of youth sport with fond memories, and that needs to be our sole agenda.
As far as playing time goes, if I am given a player to coach then I will train him or her to the best of my abilities, and what's the point in that if I don't give them significant game time.

 

[4_the_kids]

re: Playing time:
BC Soccer says up to U12 -all levels equal playing time.
U13 to U18 BCPL - guaranteed 30% playing time over the entire season, not measured on a per game basis.
For Rest U13 on wards i am not sure, some clubs have their own policies, but general i would guess anything below Div 1 should be an equal playing time policy.

Regarding tryouts:
There are two main issues with tryouts and its not the clubs per say.
1. Current coaches / parents / teams do not like to release player to play up a level, They want to keep teams together and see a player getting selected to a higher team as the club stealing their player. This is not a player first mentality but a coach /parent ego mentality or its a mentality of kids just wanting to play for fun with friends, which is fine but its not a development first thought process
2. Coach selections are horrible, unqualified coaches getting selected to coach select teams cause there existing team has some really good players on it. Clubs do this to accommodate the above but it doesn't work.

Tryouts / Select Teams / Development Teams / - are for kids (and parents) dedicated to growing, and improving within the club program , these teams are not for groups wanting to stay together or building summers teams etc. this is where clubs make the policy to play at x level you must be at tryouts, etc...
Its important to understand the intended purpose of these programs is to pool the most talented kids with like minded and skill players, further development them with goals of playing BCPL / METRO College , Provincial, National etc..
Teams wanting to stay together, play with friends, build their own programs can do so ,but know doing so can take away opportunity for the better players., these teams need to accept that they will play at a lower level and could loose players through tryouts if the player decides to go, its not a club poaching your team its a club identifying a talent and tying to develop it at a higher level

Clubs need to be way more transparent on the process, some do a fairly good job, others horrible. I attended every Surrey club tryouts last season and I would say Coastal is the most transparent followed by GAC, SU most closed as in teams are predetermined, CCB, SFC are not very transparent.

Just my opinion

 

[easoccer]

I agree with this approach to select players, however in order for it to be of any use at all there needs to be an agreement from the whole district to adopt the process. And it must include all players within a club from metro all the way down to house. There must also be another agreement stating that only individual players can transfer within a district and not coaches moving full teams when something isnt going their way. Coaches should be selected based on merit and all information pertaining to their club, certification and coaching history should be posted upon selection so that it can be as transparent as possible that the best choice was made.

Personally I would like all teams to be re-drafted every year, much like baseball. I think each player should experience several coaches over their youth carear. Every coach has different styles and things that they do that could improve a player.


NONE OF THIS WILL EVER HAPPEN.

 

[4_the_kids]

I agree with this approach to select players, however in order for it to be of any use at all there needs to be an agreement from the whole district to adopt the process. And it must include all players within a club from metro all the way down to house. There must also be another agreement stating that only individual players can transfer within a district and not coaches moving full teams when something isnt going their way. Coaches should be selected based on merit and all information pertaining to their club, certification and coaching history should be posted upon selection so that it can be as transparent as possible that the best choice was made.

Personally I would like all teams to be re-drafted every year, much like baseball. I think each player should experience several coaches over their youth carear. Every coach has different styles and things that they do that could improve a player.


NONE OF THIS WILL EVER HAPPEN.

I agree, I believe it can happen. Starting point is discussion, then movement at various club or district meetings. BC Soccer needs to play major role, mandating it.
Personally I would like to see no teams formed U5-U7, have jamboree style tournaments with random selected teams on weekends and academy style programs for mid week training. Looking for and developing coaches through this process as well .
U8-U9 no select teams., teams are formed to create balance, perhaps by way of draft. Academy program part of the weekly training, again for both the kids and the coaches. U10-U12 introduce select teams, coaches have been developed, players have been identified through transparent processes , no spot is guaranteed , each year you loose your spot and get re selected through the process. Academy for all levels, still developing the kids house and up pushing the talent level for every division to higher standards. This requires change in thought processes,. eliminating the whole team thing for the first few years it allows focus to be on development not team success. Unfortunately the summer soccer in Surrey is a big obstacle to this., it needs to either become sanctioned and follow the same paths or be dissolved. ( whole other topic not for this thread)

 

[WTF]

re: Playing time:
BC Soccer says up to U12 -all levels equal playing time.
U13 to U18 BCPL - guaranteed 30% playing time over the entire season, not measured on a per game basis.
For Rest U13 on wards i am not sure, some clubs have their own policies, but general i would guess anything below Div 1 should be an equal playing time policy.
Just my opinion

Once a coach in the youth ages from U13 - U18 has selected his roster whether its 15 , 16 or 18 then he has to give them fair playing time otherwise that coach should not have selected them.Club Executives or TD,S in Newton are not bothered if parents complain about lack of playing time for their kids. SMSA won,t do anything as its controlled by the same people.

BC Soccer / Dist 5 /Dist 4 needs to to set a minimum/fair playing rule starting NOW - minimum 30 mins each game .
Here,s a good example from the Richmond Thanksgiving Tournament Rules :
5. All players must play at least half of every game.

 

[TKBC]

@WTF - you bet. If players are selected they should play. Equal. Unless a kid hasn't been turning up at training, has another sort of attitude prob, has been injured/sick, (or my own team rule is if you are late for warm-up you don't start - which means you likely aren't playing half the game but may still and simply lose your start).

30% is a "political" answer and complete rubbish. Think about what 30% of a 60 or 70 minute game. Then think about travel time. Then think about warm-up (some coaches still warm-up for an hour - lol!).

 

[WTF]

@WTF - you bet. If players are selected they should play. Equal. Unless a kid hasn't been turning up at training, has another sort of attitude prob, has been injured/sick, (or my own team rule is if you are late for warm-up you don't start - which means you likely aren't playing half the game but may still and simply lose your start).

30% is a "political" answer and complete rubbish. Think about what 30% of a 60 or 70 minute game. Then think about travel time. Then think about warm-up (some coaches still warm-up for an hour - lol!).

BC Soccer should set a rule whereby all players need to play 30 or 40 mins per game . If a coach cannot guarantee fair or equal playing time [except for discipline reasons or non attendance for training etc] then he should not be selecting that player

 

[4_the_kids]

BC Soccer should set a rule whereby all players need to play 30 or 40 mins per game . If a coach cannot guarantee fair or equal playing time [except for discipline reasons or non attendance for training etc] then he should not be selecting that player

Remember the 30% min playing time policy is for BCSPL teams only, this level is the only level considered competitive /Elite to BC Soccer, in other words the objective at this level is as much about winning as it is development. Beyond that equal playing time is accepted rule, some clubs or districts speak to it other do not... It is tough , i certainly would hate to be a parent paying $2000+ or what ever HPL costs to have my kid sit 70% of the time. Wonder if they discount fees to those only getting 30% if teams actually do that, i think ,most give 50% min playing time. - remember to 50% playing time is still very different than the equal playing time mandate for U6-U12 all levels.
Equal playing time is tough to manage , especially if you are even the slightest bit competitive, not saying win at all cost mentality just how do you pull your star goal score with 5 mins left in a tie game to give someone else equal playing time? , not an easy thing to do.
I do like the idea of playing time is measured over a season not a game.

 

[WTF]

Remember the 30% min playing time policy is for BCSPL teams only, this level is the only level considered competitive /Elite to BC Soccer, in other words the objective at this level is as much about winning as it is development. Beyond that equal playing time is accepted rule, some clubs or districts speak to it other do not... It is tough , i certainly would hate to be a parent paying $2000+ or what ever HPL costs to have my kid sit 70% of the time. Wonder if they discount fees to those only getting 30% if teams actually do that, i think ,most give 50% min playing time. - remember to 50% playing time is still very different than the equal playing time mandate for U6-U12 all levels.
Equal playing time is tough to manage , especially if you are even the slightest bit competitive, not saying win at all cost mentality just how do you pull your star goal score with 5 mins left in a tie game to give someone else equal playing time? , not an easy thing to do.
I do like the idea of playing time is measured over a season not a game.

BCSPL is a minority of prob 5% of the total players playing in BC yet they are getting preferential treatment. There are more players playing in the U13 - U18 Metro , Gold , Silver , Bronze than any other group or leage . This is where u have some coach,s giving players as little as 5-10 mins per game and those players average 5 -10 mins playing time spread over the season.
BC Soccer , MSL , Dist 5 , Dist 4 need to take the matter seriously , get feedback via an online survey of coach,s , players , parents etc and come up with a minimum playing time set over the season.

 

[BHerd]

I could go on a diatribe on this subject to be sure....
It starts with the overarching governing bodies first and foremost.
Next, you need a good technical director and soccer club board that are "trying" to do the best for the players while keeping in mind the LTPD (long term player development pathway) which all should aspire as their priority focus.
After that, a good group of coaches to select that are "generally" unbiased and focused solely on the success of the players within their team while forward looking towards the future of those players that can advance and move on to higher levels of play with like individuals.
Being on a soccer board, I can say that all of this is extremely difficult to attain from both the top to the bottom and vice-versa.

I agree with most of what I've read here but do have to say that due to the "pro-bono" efforts of most everyone in the soccer world at the youth level you can't get away from some of the subjective nature of what happens when it comes to coaching selection, player selection as well as items such as play time, etc. without there being a little bias present.

All the above elements are certainly a little easier to manage so long as there is a governing body that is paid to represent the community, clubs, coaches and players in a manner that stays constant across soccer in all of BC.

My simple million dollar solution.......charge players 20% more for their registration fee's and have this go towards the commissioning of a paid/un-biased governing body(S) while ensuring there is a complementary and paid support group at each designated club to manage the process at the foundational level.
Seems like a simple fix but would take literally hundreds of hours of work to wade through all the bureaucracy amongst the district, provincial and national entities.

Cheers,
BHerd

 

[4_the_kids]

I could go on a diatribe on this subject to be sure....
It starts with the overarching governing bodies first and foremost.
Next, you need a good technical director and soccer club board that are "trying" to do the best for the players while keeping in mind the LTPD (long term player development pathway) which all should aspire as their priority focus.
After that, a good group of coaches to select that are "generally" unbiased and focused solely on the success of the players within their team while forward looking towards the future of those players that can advance and move on to higher levels of play with like individuals.
Being on a soccer board, I can say that all of this is extremely difficult to attain from both the top to the bottom and vice-versa.

I agree with most of what I've read here but do have to say that due to the "pro-bono" efforts of most everyone in the soccer world at the youth level you can't get away from some of the subjective nature of what happens when it comes to coaching selection, player selection as well as items such as play time, etc. without there being a little bias present.

All the above elements are certainly a little easier to manage so long as there is a governing body that is paid to represent the community, clubs, coaches and players in a manner that stays constant across soccer in all of BC.

My simple million dollar solution.......charge players 20% more for their registration fee's and have this go towards the commissioning of a paid/un-biased governing body(S) while ensuring there is a complementary and paid support group at each designated club to manage the process at the foundational level.
Seems like a simple fix but would take literally hundreds of hours of work to wade through all the bureaucracy amongst the district, provincial and national entities.

Cheers,
BHerd

Excellent points, though i don't think there is a need for a extra paid body. Starts at Canada Soccer mandating and enforcing programs, then the regional boards mandating then the districts mandating/ holding the clubs to it. Having the MLS clubs on board helps to . I think on a whole the Whitecaps and BC Soccer are doing great things, a ways to go yet but moving in the right direction.

I think the biggest problem is we have split communities who play for different reasons. Essentially recreational players, players without goals of playing pro, who just play to have fun, hang out with friends, ,get a little competition etc.. AND there is nothing wrong with that, problem is it doesn't fit the other mold of player development programs etc as that is not of interest to the recreational player. Also you have parents and coaches with different aspirations than the team or players whether it be wanting more or less.
Biggest challenge i have come across is the team mentality, that coaches think they own the rights to the player - educating the parents on LTPD and its benefits is the only answer to this, but clubs and districts need strong programs in place for parents to believe in them.
Those who have a greater goal see the benefits of a development program, would like to see the most talented players ( some who only play for recreational purposes) moving up to more advance teams, and try and get Canada Soccer on the world map.
This is an immense challenge as while growing soccer is still a fringe sport to most

 

[BHerd]

Likewise, 4 the kids! Correct in that BC Soccer and MLS are doing good things but there are broken elements to be sure.
I really like the adoption of both community and development levels @ the soccer club level for what I think is the U9-12 age groups.
This certainly helps out on the split communities issue you noted.
Again, a good club and technical director that cares for all levels of play is crucial.

Some greedy coaches do have a sense of ownership when it comes to their players, however, it's really the clubs players and not the coaches. LTPD is great in theory but lacks without execution at all levels.
The primary reason I suggest raising fee's is to combat the many issues noted.
An issue I've seen relates to how many hours it actually takes for a club to manage their day-to-day activities along with mapping out a plan for their strategic future direction.
Unfortunately, there simply isn't enough people out there to step up and take on the roles needed to handle the countless (and sometimes thankless) hours of work involved in running a soccer club. Unless someone is independently wealthy, doesn't have a job and can spend full time hours at the club level to manage everything .........I feel that the model is just going to remain somewhat broken.
Beyond the club level, the boards for each district are made up of club personnel, that again, have to find the time to unbiasedly go about the business to solve the worlds soccer issues.
Funding these boards OR established and unbiased business minded individuals that can move an agenda forwards is critical.
If there was hired professionals at the district level and within the soccer clubs I'm sure it would help immensely and reduce the amount of petty arguments that occur amongst competing clubs.
Not saying that all soccer boards and district governing bodies are broken but am stating that there are too many personal/coach/club agenda's that are even far reaching and outside of the regular soccer season clubs. There is a blurred line between what is right and good for the game and what is really happening due to agendas from clubs/individuals.

Soccer Canada and BC Soccer have paid staff and I would anticipate that it starts with them helping to reduce the conflict we all see at the grassroots level.

Cheers,
BHerd

 

[WTF]

Guys lets keep it easy & simple and best immediate solution would be to add a minimum /fair playing time of 30 mins in the MSL, Dist 4 & 5 rules -same as the BCSPL .

 

[Admin]

How is that really easy and simple though?

Who monitors - parents? Can you imagine what would happen?

 

[John McKay]

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

 

[WTF]

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

John Mckay - great post , so much sense and hope the thee likes of BC Soccer take note . LTPD is pointless as currently these organizations don,t enforce anything

 

[TKBC]

@John McKay how do you think you can possibly rank/score players @ trials?