Note: Please bear in mind that whilst this topic does canvass opinions, it is not a fight club. You may disagree with other posters but we do ask you please to stick to our Talk Guidelines and to be civil. We don't allow personal attacks or troll-hunting. Do please report any. Thanks, MNHQ.

To let my kids play football in the road?

(168 Posts)
sandyballs Fri 19-Apr-13 23:09:56

It's a quiet road and they are 12 so not little. I've told them to keep the ball low and avoid parked cars and I've watched them and they do. They're also good at looking out for cars coming.

They told me tonight that a neighbour freaked out at them saying how dangerous it was and to get out the road. She has much younger kids. I'm just pleased weather is nicer, evenings are lighter and they're outside and not on some kind of screen. AIBU?

evansthebread Sun 21-Apr-13 21:08:11

Expat - no, sadly. Even as youngsters we all KNEW. The angle, the absolute silence for a few moments.

Only child, parents devastated. As were we all.

expatinscotland Sun 21-Apr-13 21:09:31

Oh, evans! How awful. Happens so often, too.

BegoniaBampot Sun 21-Apr-13 21:13:37

because every kid has a park on their doorstep. some parks aren't safe - the nearest to us was full of drunks, some kids were assaulted, one raped and now is full of muscled tattooed charmers with their scary looking dogs. i'm not saying that kids should be allowed to run riot damaging people's property but there is such a bah humbug feeling here, folk who would probably ban any kid out playing locally within shouting distance of their house because the street is for their cars and not the those who actually live there. and i'd imagine most of the streets we are talking about are quiet residential street not argyle street on a friday night.

evansthebread Sun 21-Apr-13 21:17:47

Seriously not Bah Humbug, Begonia. Playing in the street is a real danger to kids - no matter how quiet normally.

If all the parents got together and trotted down to the park occasionally, just to make sure its a safe environment for them, and reported any potential thuggery to all involved, I'm pretty sure it would be safer than being a potential death trap due to drunk driving/boy racing/police chases.

expatinscotland Sun 21-Apr-13 21:18:44

' folk who would probably ban any kid out playing locally within shouting distance of their house because the street is for their cars and not the those who actually live there. and i'd imagine most of the streets we are talking about are quiet residential street not argyle street on a friday night.'

And yet this poster just wrote about how her friend was killed on a quiet dead end street and another about how her daughter was hit by a car on a quiet street.

A road by definition is for cars, cycles, motorbikes, vehicles and unfortunately, we cannot police which car or vehicle it is that uses them and their level of care and caution. Vehicles who don't live there can use the street as that is what it is for.

It's not a playground or play area and if people use it for that then sadly there are all too often negative consequences.

evansthebread Sun 21-Apr-13 21:20:22

Just to add that I've fought park closures wherever I've lived. When the communities I've lived in have got together after their parks being threatened with closure due to non-use/misuse, the parks have been kept open, in good order and used by the local youngsters.

Smiles all round.

BegoniaBampot Sun 21-Apr-13 21:26:22

and when there aren't parks that nearby, or people don't have decent sized gardens if gardens at all then todays kids are missing out on the fun, exercise and companionship that we and all the generations before us took for granted because people are less community minded,less tolerant and more materialistic.

IntheFrame Sun 21-Apr-13 21:35:23

However I think adults now use the roads inappropriately too. At 9,00am driving 5 minutes along the country roads that surround our semi rural estate I had to slow down serve round 8 adults jogging, 2 horses and at least 5 sporty cyclists 2 abreast . I really felt for the poor tractor driver who had a sprayer on the back and all the filthy looks he got.

Yes I realise all of them are allowed to but they are roads and not an extension of the gym. It's a pain every Sunday when the suns out. When one of them gets knocked down it's totally the drivers fault.

I don't mind the horses by the way seeing as how we are in the countryside. I don't have an answer but it's too busy down south.

BegoniaBampot Sun 21-Apr-13 21:51:09

what is inappropriately though. thought a road was for transport as has been mentioned here. most rural roads don't have pavements. guess if someone doesn't have a car but wants to get from A-B they should just stay at home as roads are for cars. doesn't matter that the cars aren't driving safely and with due care - roads are for cars and anyone else who doesn't have a big shiny new car can fuckety off. yes, i've been out (in my shiny big fancy car) imbibing a few wines but car rules and anyone else can suck it.

EmmelineGoulden Sun 21-Apr-13 22:15:09

Experiments in Europe have shown that mixed use space becomes safer when there are lots of people doing what some here are calling 'inappropriate' things on the road because drivers stop feeling like the roads are only for cars, and so they start driving more safely. And in the end, that's what cuts down pedestrian injuries, drivers driving more cautiously. Pedestrians already use a lot more caution than drivers when they use roads (those kids playing football in the road are probably more aware of the traffic on the road than most drivers would be while driving). Motorways are only for cars, but residential roads are not. The more drivers get into the mindset that the only thing that should be on a road is another car when there can be other types of users, the more people get killed.

That's why you're seeing more and more mixed use space in cities. It's not because the planners got bored. It's because road safety experts have discovered that car/pedestrian seperation is a false reality in many situations. And all road users need to start seeing spaces as being places they need to negotiate with all other road users. Removing signs that indicate the road is all for them (such as differentiated road surface and right of way indicators) forces drivers to be far more cautious when they are driving and that cuts injuries.

WorrySighWorrySigh Sun 21-Apr-13 22:17:59

50 minute walk to the park or risk spending hours in casualty and weeks on crutches (or worse).

Is it a difficult choice to make?

IntheFrame Sun 21-Apr-13 22:39:43

Most of the mixed space stuff is designated though - either through design or signage.
You can't just make a car park mixed use.

And most is urban - not many tractors with large sprayers in the cities.

EmmelineGoulden Sun 21-Apr-13 22:49:34

They get installed in urban areas but that doesn't mean the principles don't apply elsewhere. We see it for cyclist safety too. The thing that makes cyclists safest is having more cyclists on the road. The reason it works is because it forces car drivers to realise they don't, in fact, own the road and there are going to be obstacles to their journey.

The horse rider and cyclist and joggers (and tractor) you met on the country road are important in stopping car drivers from driving too fast along such roads. The more common those 'inappropriate' users are, the more drivers expect to meet them and so the less they make erroneous assumptions about how they can safely drive.

IntheFrame Sun 21-Apr-13 23:02:00

No one can drive too fast on the twisty roads we have near us. The roads are single lane with obscured views. They are just dangerous roads and not designed for a whole army of Sunday leisure users.

The point is in the same way as the kids playing football in residential roads. They cause a nuisance because they aren't designed for ball games.

BegoniaBampot Sun 21-Apr-13 23:08:58

doesn't really sound like nthey are designed for cars either then if they are windy and single lane. so maybe we shoud ban the cars that cause the harm and designate them for walkers and leisure goers. sounds no less weird.

IntheFrame Sun 21-Apr-13 23:15:46

Er apart from people do actually work/live get from A to B in the country! Not everyone in Hampshire gets on a train to work in London from Monday to Friday - and go jogging at the weekends.

EmmelineGoulden Sun 21-Apr-13 23:56:49

Those roads were designed much more for horses, pedestrians and gyglists than they were for modern cars.

I'm playing a bit of devils advocate on this thread, because I do of course realise that we use cars, mainly, to try to get from A to B faster. And I will swear my back teeth off sat behind a "Sunday driver".

But cars aren't the only use of roads. Historically they have not even been the main use. This demand that other users should give up their rights to road space is a matter of appropriating land for a narrower use than it once had, basically so we can drive faster. Yet in driving faster we make those roads less safe. And an insistence on such a change is a matter of demanding that some people (pedestrians amoung others) lose out while others (drivers) gain.

In the context of the OP we're talking about children stepping out of their house and being less welcome and unsafe in the space around them. Posters' protests about them playing in the street are two fold: the kids endanger the cars - so the kids should go; and the kids are endangered by the cars - so the kids should go.

It is a very entitled view of the use of public space and places the convenience of drivers above all other concerns. Fundamentally I disagree with it because I think the way cars make our residential areas more hostile to pedestrians, and especially children, should be addressed not encouraged. Accepting residential streets as truely shared space would help with that.

acogzell Thu 27-Feb-14 14:45:45

I have really bad problems with a family over the road from me. Her kids are alwsys out in the roaf with a hard case ball. There friends all come over and they have a football match, not only r they noisy the ball is bashing against my fence, car, door and windows. Kids should be allowed to play out and have fun but not damaging neighbours property. About four of us compained to the housing association about the kids causing trouble. It stopped for a while, then when i had a new car it started up again. Then when my neighbour had new car they were throwing the ball at her new car. I don't come home till its dark as im sick of the arguments when they see my car on the drive out they come with hard case ball. Ended up falling out with mom as she couldn't see problem as kids out next day with ball. They judt doing it to wind me up now.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now