Another rule in youth sports

[dklaiman]

I was going to caption this thread "another dumb rule" but I'd like to hear opinions on both sides of the issue. This link summarizes the rule pretty well.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/0...-five-points-and-you-lose-ottawa-league-says/

With a kid who's a fledgling hockey goalie, I hate to see a team get destroyed by a lot of goals/points, but I see no reason to penalize the better team. In my son's league 3 on 3 league, once one team gets a 10 goal lead, they simply stop posting goals for the team that's ahead. When the team that's behind scores, the scorekeeper adds a goal for both teams. It's happenned a lot to my kid's team (last night we only lost 24-10), but there's no reason for the other team to be handed a loss simply because they could score and we couldn't.

Am I missing something? Is there wisdom in the Ottawa league's rule?

 

[bradyarz]

ridiculous

 

[tg16]

Sports are competitive, yet this rule removes the competition. It does all a disservice in that the winners can't win and the losers have no motivation to improve. If the game is runaway, then the losing team should throw in the towel or play it out and let the numbers fall. There is honor in playing your best, win or lose. This rule stifles that.

 

[ouch]

At least they're not working for the military.

 

[JDV]

Just another sign of the times unfortunately. If you are the better team you deserve the win instead of all this PC nonsense. I'm sorry, but the mindset this sort of thing instills is incorrect IMHO. The saying "it's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game" doesn't really mean the same thing now that it did when I was a kid since these days the games are rigged with ideals and rules just like this instance.

 

[Amer]

Utterly ridiculous. I was on the wrong end of a lot of sports matches throughout my career in different sports. When the kid wants to keep playing even though his team loses every game, that's when he's learned the proper lesson.

It seems like whenever I took up a new sport I'd be on the team that always won. Soccer, Hockey, Lacrosse, I was on annual powerhouses. However after a few years the team would move up a league and my parents wouldn't be able to afford it or I'd graduate to a new age bracket or whatnot and be left behind to play on a team that was a constant loser. Eventually I learned the enjoyment of playing the game instead of the enjoyment of winning.

Kids need to experience disappointment just like the rest of us. I'm not sure why anyone would want them to wait until they are an adult to go through it. Let those that have greater ability succeed.

 

[ouch]

Yankee Stadium, August 2017

Voice of John Sterling-

It is high. It is far. It is GONE! A walk off home run by Alex Rodriguez. Mmm, an A-bomb, by A-Rod. Yankees lose! Thuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh Yankees lose!

 

[TimmyBoston]

I played competitive sports through college and for older kids mercy rules are counter-productive, but for small kids they should be there. There's no reason to humiliate a small child.

 

[DaveF]

I don't like this implementation, but I agree with Timmy that for younger kids (this league is for 4-6 yr olds), some kind of mercy rule is warranted. In my (6-yr-old) son's soccer league, once a team is up by three goals, they have to sit a player for every additional goal they score. To me that is a more fair solution than automatically assigning a loss to a dominant team who wins by more than 5 goals. After all, what is to prevent an unscrupulous losing coach whose team gets down by 5 goals from directing his kids to score an own-goal and thereby gain a victory?

It's a dumb implementation of a necessary measure.

 

[dklaiman]

I agree that there's no reason to humiliate a small child and that there are several reasonable options to prevent that from happening. I'm not sure that the rule imposed by the Ottawa youth soccer league fits that definition, though. Speaking from my experience as a father of a kid whose team frequently gets humiliated, Dairy Queen seems to be the option of choice for my son and his teammates.

 

[ouch]

There's a line of thought that says humiliation prepares boys for marriage.

 

[Rollie Juddernaut Fingers]

Sports are competitive, yet this rule removes the competition. It does all a disservice in that the winners can't win and the losers have no motivation to improve. If the game is runaway, then the losing team should throw in the towel or play it out and let the numbers fall. There is honor in playing your best, win or lose. This rule stifles that.

Yeah, you can't penalize someone for being good at what they do. You can penalize them for being a jerk about it, and that's where unsportsmanlike conduct or delay of game due to excessive celebration comes in.

 

[Doc4]

I played competitive sports through college and for older kids mercy rules are counter-productive, but for small kids they should be there. There's no reason to humiliate a small child.

+1

The league in question goes from age 4 to age 18.

Personally, I think "running up the score" is unsportsmanlike, and ought to be discouraged, but it should be something that all the coaches are doing individually so there is no need for yet another rule.

But if we do need a rule, make it a true mercy rule where the game just ends early.

 

[luvmysuper]

I don't like this implementation, but I agree with Timmy that for younger kids (this league is for 4-6 yr olds), some kind of mercy rule is warranted. In my (6-yr-old) son's soccer league, once a team is up by three goals, they have to sit a player for every additional goal they score. To me that is a more fair solution than automatically assigning a loss to a dominant team who wins by more than 5 goals. After all, what is to prevent an unscrupulous losing coach whose team gets down by 5 goals from directing his kids to score an own-goal and thereby gain a victory?

It's a dumb implementation of a necessary measure.

That is the ages of two kids of one of the speakers.
The league is from 4 to 18 years old.

Quote:
"Mr. Cappon said the organization is trying to “reinvent the wheel” by fostering a non-competitive environment. The league has 3,000 children enrolled ranging in age from four to 18 years old."

We are raising a generation of "Tea Cup" kids, who will shatter at the least provocation.

No one wants to see a little kid humiliated, but there are better ways to handle this than the way it was done.

There are many in our society that would destroy the next generation in the name of "saving" them.

http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=110854

 

[Rollie Juddernaut Fingers]

I was going to caption this thread "another dumb rule" but I'd like to hear opinions on both sides of the issue. This link summarizes the rule pretty well.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/0...-five-points-and-you-lose-ottawa-league-says/

With a kid who's a fledgling hockey goalie, I hate to see a team get destroyed by a lot of goals/points, but I see no reason to penalize the better team. In my son's league 3 on 3 league, once one team gets a 10 goal lead, they simply stop posting goals for the team that's ahead. When the team that's behind scores, the scorekeeper adds a goal for both teams. It's happenned a lot to my kid's team (last night we only lost 24-10), but there's no reason for the other team to be handed a loss simply because they could score and we couldn't.

Am I missing something? Is there wisdom in the Ottawa league's rule?

There is some sick twisted wisdom in Ottawa's rules. The criticism that it doesn't prepare children for real life is unfounded. What of Switzerland with its 110 % tax bracket? What of the age old adage, that no matter how hard you work sometimes you can't get ahead?

But seriously, if you don't like how competitive soccer works, don't play it. If you want a game where accumulating too much is an automatic loss, play Black Jack.

I lost every soccer game I ever played as a kid. It never bothered me. I do believe than in the real world, people have achieved more by working together, than taking up arms against each other, but for a children's soccer game? It's time to put in a little perspective. Besides does anyone realize how rare 5 goal leads in SOCCER are?

 

[luvmysuper]

There is some sick twisted wisdom in Ottawa's rules. The criticism that it doesn't prepare children for real life is unfounded. What of Switzerland with its 110 % tax bracket? What of the age old adage, that no matter how hard you work sometimes you can't get ahead?

But seriously, if you don't like how competitive soccer works, don't play it. If you want a game where accumulating too much is an automatic loss, play Black Jack.

I lost every soccer game I ever played as a kid. It never bothered me. I do believe than in the real world, people have achieved more by working together, than taking up arms against each other, but for a children's soccer game? It's time to put in a little perspective. Besides does anyone realize how rare 5 goal leads in SOCCER are?

Apparently, not rare enough to prevent a bone headed Committee from coming up with this rule!

 

[Obsessed]

I played competitive sports through college and for older kids mercy rules are counter-productive, but for small kids they should be there. There's no reason to humiliate a small child.

I agree with that. I do think the "win by too much and you lose" rule is crazy, but the mercy rule it replaced (according to the article) seems fine, or maybe a rule where the game just ends, as Doc4 mentioned.

Also, whatever happened to teaching sportsmanship and not running up the score? It sounds like some of the coaches in this league (a kids' league) may have failed in that regard.

 

[Ruck]

As more and more of this sort of self-esteem-protectionism-stuff comes to be, I wonder what the participation level would be if a parent decided to start their own league where game play is game play, and these new-age coddling rules are left out.

My wife is due to pop our first child out literally any day now. My dad was my soccer coach for years, as he was for my older brothers and sister. I've considered the idea of becoming a coach for my son if/when he takes an interest, but I'm not going to participate in teaching kids this sort of over-the-top, fluffy-love nonsense.

Sure, not keeping score at all for the youngsters can be appropriate until they grasp the skills to play the game on more competitive level. After that, getting shut down and trounced from time to time teaches you to be humble in your wins and losses. "Everyone wins" is a crippling concept.

 

[dklaiman]

Sure, not keeping score at all for the youngsters can be appropriate until they grasp the skills to play the game on more competitive level.

I'm the father of 4 boys. The older three are old enough to play sports and have done so for years. It doesn't matter if an official score is kept. Every kid knows the final score of the game. I think the unofficial reason for not keeping score is so that parents--who may or may not be paying attention--don't get too angry if their kid's team loses or come up with rules like this one.

 

[TimmyBoston]

+1

The league in question goes from age 4 to age 18.

Personally, I think "running up the score" is unsportsmanlike, and ought to be discouraged, but it should be something that all the coaches are doing individually so there is no need for yet another rule.

But if we do need a rule, make it a true mercy rule where the game just ends early.

That's what I was suggesting. The one in article is ridiculous, but mercy rules are there for a reason with little kids. Because they're are also enough terrible parents out there who don't discourage their kids from running up the score.