Coach leaving my son out of the team

[Mousybrown]

I'm really not if I should say anything or not as I'm normally pretty easygoing about kids stuff but this has really got my back up.
my son has played for the same football team for the last 7 years, every training session and match, he is there no matter what the weather...even if he is just on the bench but following a text from the new coach ( who has just taken the team over)he has been left out of the squad for the first two matches of this coming season ( not even on the bench, he has been told not to come...unless he wants to each from the sidelines).......this would be fine (ish) was it not for the fact that the new coach has taken on severl new players over the summer, some who already play for other teams and theses 'new boys' have been included in the team in some capacity either as players or as subs.
My son is gutted ( he is 11) and he doesn't want to go at the weekend to watch with all the other boys asking him why he isn't playing or in the kit and I really want to tell the coach to shove it......I know he isn't their star player and they want to put a good team out but......the kids has been a loyal player for years and he has been overlooked for kids who are only just signed and I feel so sad for him.......so would I be unreasonable to speak to the coach or not??

"You do need seeded teams - if you don't have enough players to have more than one team, then I think you need to be fair and rotate the players."

So the coach can never use his discretion to pick the most appropriate team for any match- it has to be strict rotation. Even if you're playing a team you might just beat if you field your best 11?

And all these people saying there should be two teams- are you prepared to coach it? There was a long thread a while ago where most posters weren't even prepared to give a coach's son a lift to matches so that he could take his team to a different venue...........it was suggested that if he didn't have a car he should go on the bus!

Coaches are volunteers and it's a tough role. But they need to be fair

I agree. But being fair is not the same as being equitable.

Is it really fair to put a weak player up against really strong opposition? It can be very damaging to self esteem. It can also be dangerous, despite what some previous posters seem to think - I know this from experience. It's much fairer to play a weaker player against weaker opposition. It's better for their confidence, and gives them a chance to have a proper game, and is ultimately better for their development.

I completely agree with Lweji and Anotheruser's previous posts and looking for fairness within a team doesn't mean that you're a helicopter parent or that you deem your child too precious, of course disappointments are always going to happen in sport but unfair treatment shouldn't.

In answer to BertrandRussell's question about people being prepared to coach a second team, in our case my husband is not a qualified coach himself but he was more than willing to set up and help run a second team and did have a qualified coach set up. Our problem was getting sufficient players for another team, hence him ending up contacting a neighbouring team who were looking for more players. With regard to helping out with lifts etc, everyone involved does this and helps out in any way they can - it's all about working together for the sake of the kids.

It is good to hear that there are some great teams out there though that do operate a fair and inclusive policy, as in Lauren15's case.

I hear what you are saying too budgiegirl, with us it was a case of our son and others being completely overlooked rather than being matched against appropriate abilities.

If this team becomes only about competition (it's still to be determined), or any other team does, then they should be upfront about it and select players that they want there and release the others to go to more relaxed teams.

Lweji I think being upfront is the key. I have no problem with a team being competitive, but children and parents need to know this. They can then decide what they want from their club. Teams play at different levels, there's usually several pools in the league, and children need to find a club that suits their level of play. It makes the whole thing happier for everyone.

"Annaliesey - all the posts on here indicate that moving to another club doesn't work as he will be viewed as coming in to take somebody else's rightful place!
The OP can't complain that new players are joining her club and taking her son's place and then move to another club to take someone else's place.
Because apparently players have a right to a place if they have been there for enough years." ...

What I mean here is to get on the phone and ring around to other clubs and find out which ones are currently under-subscribed. Some will be full or even too many players but others will have room for new players. They may not guarantee that DS plays in the position he wants but it sounds like he will get more time outfield than he is at the moment with a coach that is more focused on a fair-play policy if that is what the OP wants. Usually players just go along for training sessions and see how they get on. It's not a case of taking somebody else's rightful place. Sometimes an additional team might be being formed. (and remember that the new lads into the OP's current team are likely to have come from somewhere else so there's natural movement).

I'm saying that the OP has a right to make choices for her and her DS. If it is clear that this team is now being operated on a play-for-positions basis then you can take that information and make a decision based on that. I doubt the OP will get anywhere by whinging and complaining to the current manager or club secretary or league chairman. But... you can ask the club to make it clear if they are now operating on a play-for-positions basis so that you can take yourself, your DS, and your subs money elsewhere :)

The FA have produced articles about kids not just leaving their current teams but when they leave, they leave the game/sport altogether. This is the basis behind things such as 'Respect' initiative where were all aimed at keeping kids in the sport.

I'm not against competitive play or being in competitive environments (My daughter does dance and that can be very harsh) but I do believe it is all about choice whether you choose to be in a competitive environment or not. A lot of hobbies and sports are for fun and people choose to opt out of the competitive pressures for a variety of reasons :) I don't think that's molly codling it's prioritising the taking part / sport / self-esteem aspects over competitive involvement.

Possibly there are other options too such as joining the secondary school football team instead?

Annaliesey I think what you have said makes a lot of sense. Children need to find a club that suits them. It is a shame if the new coach has changed the ethos without explaining it, but that's why I think the OP should have a chat with him.

Possibly there are other options too such as joining the secondary school football team instead? Unfortunately IME, school teams are even more cut-throat than clubs. At my DSs school, if you don't play rugby, you don't make the football team, no matter what your ability.

*"You do need seeded teams - if you don't have enough players to have more than one team, then I think you need to be fair and rotate the players."

So the coach can never use his discretion to pick the most appropriate team for any match- it has to be strict rotation. Even if you're playing a team you might just beat if you field your best 11?*

Could you go back and read the whole of my comment?

As for Is it really fair to put a weak player up against really strong opposition? It can be very damaging to self esteem. It can also be dangerous, despite what some previous posters seem to think - I know this from experience. It's much fairer to play a weaker player against weaker opposition. It's better for their confidence, and gives them a chance to have a proper game, and is ultimately better for their development.

I don't disagree. But we are talking about a player paying their subs and then sitting on the bench week in and week out. Nobody is going to object to their child being left out ONE week or only playing for part of a match one week if there are good reasons for doing so. But generally everyone should get to play as much as possible. Sitting on the bench in the cold every week will do nothing for your self-esteem or your ability as a footballer.

As for volunteering to coach football, I used to do the pitch bookings, was a school governor for 8 years, am a running coach, an athletics official, child welfare officer for my running club and have been a newsletter editor for my running club. Among other things. So please don't make comments about volunteering when you have no idea of what the mums on this board do. Plus the fact that some people want a competitive ethos, some want their kids to be able to play football. There should be room for both. It's not unreasonable to say there should be more than one team.

It's not unreasonable to say there should be more than one team.

It's not unreasonable to say it, but only if you are prepared to step up and do it. Also, it may not be logistically possible to run more than one team. I know the club my DS plays for struggles with pitch allocation every weekend. They would find it incredibly difficult to field another team, even assuming they could find a volunteer to run it, due to lack of pitches. It's usually not nearly as easy to run a second team as it sounds.

Nobody is going to object to their child being left out ONE week or only playing for part of a match one week if there are good reasons for doing so

Oh, you'd be surprised. There are plenty of parents that question every decision the coach makes with regard to team selection and substitutions. The children are not nearly as vocal about it as the parents.

People can be as high horsey as they like. There isn't a volunteer led children's activity that isn't desperate for people. As I said , there was a depressing thread on here where the vast majority of posters were not even prepared to give a lift to matches to a coach's son so he could go and manage another team. People were saying he should either buy a car or go on the bus.......

When I was a nipper, (70's,80's) the best players played in the team, it was always about winning and when you got to county level and above it changed again, the intensity level rose a couple more notches..
Wait a few yrs and they kids can play in the open age leagues, plenty of teams for all abilities..
Parents need to stop molly coddling their kids and let them get used to rejection and disappointment..

I know the club my DS plays for struggles with pitch allocation every weekend
really ? the clubs I know play one team at home and the other team away

really ? the clubs I know play one team at home and the other team away

That works if there's only one age group, but our club has 8 different age groups, some of which have two teams. So there are 12 teams using three pitches. It's just about doable with some teams playing away, and home teams doing staggered starts (so some starting at 9, some starting at 10.30 and sometimes some at 12). But to add yet another team would be very difficult.

My local club has 54 children's teams (up to 6 per age). They certainly struggle with finding enough pitches, let alone changing facilities.

on turning 11 my son having never missed a training session was NEVER picked to play in the team, or to go to the match and be on for at least a few minutes .
He was the ONLY kid in the team who was never picked. Every Wednesday the email would go out to the parents saying which kids were going to the match. Most weeks EVERY OTHER KID's name was on it. his never was. He was very smart at spotting that if another boy's name was not on the list , that boy was on holiday .

That sit ok with you, frank bough?

That is rough on your DS, Regularhiding, did you never ask the coach why this was?

As I said upthread, my DH had a child in the team he coached that just wasn't up to the standard of the other players, not by a long way, and DH felt that it wasn't fair to the child, or to the other team members, to play him, other than in occasional friendlies. But DH did take the time to explain this to the child and his parents, who understood the situation and the child still came along to all training, to improve his football. DH even explained that he may be able to help find another club team that would suit the child's ability level better, but the child was happy to carry on training, knowing that it was unlikely that he would be picked.

It's hard on a kid to see everyone else being picked for the team, and not him. Sometimes though I do think parents and children need to be realistic about the situation, and if they are unhappy about it, do something proactive to sort it. But communication is key.

That's awful Regularhiding, I really feel for your son as ours found himself in a very similar situation some months back also having rarely missed a session in years. To this day the coach has never given us a reason, despite having been asked on a regular basis. Completely agree with budgiegirl that communication is key - your husband sounds like what every coach should be.

your husband sounds like what every coach should be

Thanks, I think he was a great coach, but he did, of course, make mistakes. And he quickly learnt that you can't please everyone, no matter what you do.

And it was partly for this reason that he left coaching last season after 10 years, because in the end he found that a few (although not many) parents would give him constant grief over decisions he made, even though he would explain the decisions. Some parents just can't understand why their kids can't play every minute of every game. It wasn't the kids, it was the parents. It was a shame

Yes I've heard this said many times from coaches, ex coaches and/or their wives! We completely understand a coach has decisions to make, often tough ones, but when a new guy came on board at our son's club it was obvious it was going to be his way or the highway, in fact he told my husband, 'If people don't like it they can vote with their feet', he has certainly never communicated properly as your husband obviously did. It's tough when you're left with a very sad boy and you're non the wiser yourself. We were totally unprepared for the headaches football would cause, it's certainly been an eye-opener!

Frankbough if the kids don't get picked and thus get less play, they will not develop as players. The other kids will get better and as time passes, the players who regularly get less time will drop out. They won't stay in the game until they are older.

Some of you might enjoy this book.

if the kids don't get picked and thus get less play, they will not develop as players

While that is true , it is also true that a player playing in a team well above his ability will not develop either, it's more likely to knock his confidence completely. It's genuinely better for that player to develop in training only, or to find a team that plays at his level.

It's can be a very difficult situation, but if handled carefull by coaches and parents it can be ok. The problems arise when you've got a coach who doesn't communicate effectively, or a parent who won't listen.

That looks like a great read Polkadots. I'm between books ATM so might give this a go and give it to DH to read too!