To think if you practice you should get a chance(69 Posts)
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
I meant to say something about that too kickass - if you're in a team with better players, chances are your game will pick up too, thus giving you more of a chance to improve.
DH plays tennis - his game varies according to the level of his opponents, always improving when he's playing better players.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
YANBU op I help out with sport and we always acknowledge those who put the effort in and turn up to training by playing them in some matches. At this age they need proper game experience to get the feel of the game and improve techniques.
That said many schools we play against do just choose their best so it's not particularly unusual.
I was entirely ready to say YABU, just because you practice doesn't mean you get to play.
I hate how everything is so PC now, trophies for participating, medals for everyone in the race, it is silly. children need to be taught that to succeed (and win) you have to work hard to be the best, if everyone is rewarded all the time then there is no motivation to work hard.
If everyone who trains gets to be on the team then the team won't be it's best. Realistically they should pick the best players for the team and send the rest away, but it is good that they are letting other have the chance to practice and improve for a chance to join the team.
HOWEVER, when I saw that your DD, and the rest of the children, are only years 5 and 6 I do think that applies as strongly, they are only young, and why I still think its important to teach them that it's hard work that makes you succeed, I think it's also important to let DC's all have a chance at that age.
IUWY OP I would pull DD from that team and find another local netball team for her to join.
You have to think too about the competition - if a mixed ability team go to a match against a selected ability team and get slaughtered 35 nil, that is awful for confidence.
In our area it is competitive, and there are leagues, and at primary boys and girls both play in the same netball team, and in borough competitions you have to field a mixed team, the same for the football and tag rugby
I certainly don't think the school are organising this well, really doesn't seem fair though, there surely is a better way.
Not everyone can be the best at a certain thing at a certain time, but if they get picked anyway what will that teach them? Entitlement.
Everyone is different and will excel in different areas, accept this and teach it your kids. When they find something they like and they are good at, it will be all the sweeter knowing the failures they endured already.
IME this attitude tends to be held by people who have already found the thing they excel at and so tend to be quite smug about it.
At school many children havent found the thing that they excel at (an awful lot never will). Teaching children from an early age that no matter how hard they try they wont be good enough seems to be a very harsh lesson and not a good one as it encourages children to give up if they dont get a quick result.
I remember being so desperate tojoin netball that I volunteered to be the ball girl. I got changes every practice, just to get the balls as the went off court. Then someone was off sick and I was put in goal shoot. I was actually good. The teacher had just judged me on my footwork.
I hate sports and think I'm no good, despite being tall and slim.
DD's school have some competitive matches and some inclusive matches. They are not listed as the A and B team, but this week as the red and yellow.
YANBU, if you are playing at a high level then of course you field team you can, but certainly for friendly matches everyone should get a chance. Recently we have noticed that this is happening in club rugby as well, there are plenty of players who play for several teams (higher level) and yet these boys are still first choice to play the regular fixtures, whereas boys who only ever play in these matches only get half a match at best. As the league is non-competetive, ie. just friendly matches I feel very strongly that the "weaker" boys who turn up to training should be given the most time on the pitch while the "prima donnas" who feel that they have no need to practice as they are SO good should be the substitutes. (and yes, my own DS plays every match, so it's not sour grapes). Children will NOT improve at sport unless they get a chance to play matches, fact! Training is a completely different thing to having a match.
Just being okay with not being good enough is sometimes a good lesson to learn. How would you feel if your DD had a real talent, but wasn't allowed to play competitively because the rota had to be fair to everyone?
The thing is, this is school sports we are talking about here. You would have a fair point if it were an out of school club that exists just for the sake of playing that sport, but this is in school, where every child should have access to what is on offer.
All children need to learn to be part of a team, all children can benefit from the experience of going to others schools and competing, and most importantly, all children need to be able to take part in a form of exercise they enjoy.
If school sports teams exclude children on ability, then it's no wonder that we have the highest rate of child obesity ever. You wouldn't tell a dyslexic child that they aren't allowed to enter the school spelling competition. This is no different.
Yes, many sports do get competitive from a young age. My kids play football. one started out in a new B team for an established team at age 7. By the bend of the season the weaker players who had been there from the start through hail and snow and when they were desperate for players were dropped as better players were brought into the team. At age 6 my youngest's team was quite established and competitve that new kids coming along to play for the first time and get involved didn't have a look in. Don't get me started on tennis with kids age 7 playing 3 and 5 times a week with private tution.
I just don't remember sport being that organised and competitive when I was young in the 70's and 80's.
I think its crap.
I was a good sprinter but not recognised as being one of the sporty ones so never got picked. The PE teachers only ever picked their favourites and the ones that participated in all the sports.
We had a race between the 4 houses and i wanted to run for my house. I seriousley thought that when i raised my hand i'd get picked as i was miles faster than anyone else but i was ignored and they decided for us all to run and the person that won would be chosen. I won by a huge mile so i did get chosen in the end but the point i'm making is that although i was fast i wasn't in the core bunch of favourites so no-one ever noticed if i was good or not. I used to get a C on my report every term no matter how hard i worked and it's because the teachers never took any notice of me.
When i got to high school i had the same fave girls in my PE class. We did timed runs against each other and i came joint 2nd (and equal to the 2nd fastest fave girl who used to run for my city). I thought that would mean i would get some recognition but sadly not. I think that with a bit of encouragement i could have been pretty good but it just put me off competitive sports for life. How is anyone ever going to get better if they are not encouraged?
I am sad to see that in the 20+ years since i left school nothing has changed.
yanbu but ime it simply doesn't work like that even in an ostensibly "inclusive" school. Teams are preselected and others get the odd token match. The gap between those who matter and those who don't gets wider as more attention is given to them and they gain more match experience. dd got so peed off with hers that when it came to deciding between "team" practice and Brownies she opted for the latter much to the annoyance of the games teacher !
YANBU - this is primary school, the kids are very young, and the ones who show enough interest and dedication to turn up for regular training should be given a chance to be on a team, either through a rota system or having A and B teams.
I don't buy all that 'kids who are good at sports but not at academic subjects have to be given a chance to shine' stuff - my DD (year 5) is one of those kids. She competes regularly in her extra-curricular club sports, enjoys it, and knows she is good (and she happily accepts that she finds english and maths more difficult).
Her school is very inclusive, and always rotates the teams, giving all the children who attend the practice sessions a chance to take part.
why is it that with sport we have to be all about the taking part, but we happily set kids in other subjects like maths. I still remember being the only kid in the school not allowed in the choir (junior school) but the thing I was great at sport - the team had to rotate so all the kids got a go - fair?!?!
However, now I am a grown up (boo!) i get it - I think school sport should be about encouraging children to live a healthy life and stay involved in sport as they grow up, so the school does need to come up with a way of allowing all the kids to play in matches, while not upsetting the competitive ones - friendly matches could be an option
If they have enough players, then I think they should have a B team (and C and D, or however many). If they're arranging fixtures, then surely some of the other schools they play could also field more than one team?
That way, you can have both an A team of the best players, and other less selected teams so everyone can join in.
Just ask for a B team to be formed,
You cannot ask for someone to give up their deserved place on a team.
The only problem with A and B teams is that the gulf gradually gets wider. My DS plays football for the local under 9s, he is doubly disadvantaged as he only joined last year and he has Asperger's syndrome. The coach is brilliant and has set up a B team for the boys who aren't strong enough for the A team (which is very strong, they are top of the area under 9 league), The B team play friendlies but not every week and some of the players play for either team. However it is apparent in training that the A team regulars are getting better and better while the B teamers are improving much more slowly. It is fine for now, my DS is happy with it, he loves it when he gets a game but would get slaughtered in the A team, however I don't think it's is sustainable long term.
Well there's 2 things here, firstly, I don't think it's a case that your DD goes to all the practice sessions so should get a place, more that the other children who don't go to practice should learn they lose their place for that week for not turning up to training.
However, it's also a useful lesson that there are somethings you aren't as good at as others, no matter how hard you try. On the face of it, that's not fair, but that's how things outside of schools work. It's not always "if you do X and Y you'll get Z" sometimes, you can do X and Y and not get Z, or someone can miss either X or Y and still get Z.
If the school wants to always put out the best team they should pick a squad (team +3) and run the practise sessions just for the squad or make it quite clear that others can come to practise but will not be picked because they are not in the squad.
I don't think it's fair to get little kids turning up week in week out, thinking they might be picked when its not going to happen.
I work for a company that teaches a sport to children and I can assure you that there is massive competition within kids sport form an early age, however there are ways to manage it so that everyone gets a go. We run elite teams for those that are very talented and play 3,4 or 5 times a week, but we also run teams for those that are not quite up to that standard.
I agree, OP. I was picked for the team I think precisely because I was committed, I was never that good at team sports. Also see drama club. I got picked for parts because I would always be there, learn my lines quickly and everyone elses!
Best players in the A team (and have B team if there are enough numbers). Competitive sport is ultimately about winning, it's soul destroying when someone is 'given a chance' despite being an obvious weak link...it also causes resentment (on the part of more skilled players who have been left out and the rest of the team if they then lose).
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.