Boys school football team should have boys in??

[plastique]

So son has come home from school, disappointed not to get in the yr 8 school football team. Ok fair enough, there must be better players than him.... Well that's life move on etc!!! Oh no that's not the case. Two girls are in the boys football team.. Fair enough too if boys are allowed in girls football team... But oh no girls only... Trying to teach equality etc but this goes against everything!! Thoughts please....

It's pretty normal to have an "open" team and a girls team. Just as a 10 year old can play in the U14 team if they happen to be good enough, or a Paralympic runner can compete in the Olympics if they're fast enough.

It is a bit tough on the quite good but not great boys who get bumped off the side like the OP's son, but if he's at the very beginning of year 8 then the girls will probably drop away soon as the boys puberty kicks in. I'd concentrate my efforts more on getting a proper B Team in place so that all the good but not great boys get a chance to play (not just the two who lost out to the girls)

Interesting, they are implementing exactly what I suggested in another thread about Caster Semenya. There shouldn't be a division between male and female in sport, instead the categories should be "open" and "female". Anyone who is good enough should be allowed in the what is usually called the boys team, the "female" category is for the large group of people who possess a particular disadvantage when it comes to sport. Though perhaps the difference between boys and girls only really exists after puberty, so one could argue that all teams before that age should be mixed. The less able players, male or female, could be in a second team.

1sttimedad's response isn't treating girls like any other player on the pitch, it is quite clearly singling them out and treating them differently.

Girls drop out from practicing sports at a rate of 6 times the drop out rate of boys. There are vastly fewer opportunities for girls to play sport than there are for boys. The only way to change this is to encourage girls to play more and play at a good level.

If this is a goal of the school, they have failed to communicate it and upset at least one family in the process. Better communication may have avoided this.

Though perhaps the difference between boys and girls only really exists after puberty, so one could argue that all teams before that age should be mixed

The problem with only having mixed teams, even before puberty, is that mixed football teams will be dominated by boys, and this means that very few girls (talented or not) will be playing football. Girls should be very much encouraged to play sport, and having both a mixed team and a girls team is an effective way of providing this encouragement.

I was making a point from a 12 year olds attitude giving it some male prospective I would never allow my daughter to tell lay in a mixed team at that age. Specially with the school boy banter, roughness and other tom foolery. It should be girls team, boys team, b teams for each so all kids get a game and get some exercise instead of been left out. But I'm a male and my opinion doesn't matter on here

A mixed team and a girls team? So theoretically it's fair and even to have 22 opportunities for girls to start but only 11 for boys? (Not including subs etc)

Equality sure seems odd sometimes. Bit like girls having the entire scouting movement open while the boys only have beavers, cubs and scouts.

my daughter plays boys football, she has never been left out and is in fact better than most of the boys.

they changed the rules about girls playing in boys teams a few years back, they can now play right up until they are in under 18's. quite rightly too. it was horrible for my daughter to have to switch to a girls team at 11 just because.

school boy banter, roughness and other tom foolery.

or how about teaching boys to play respectfully

girls are just as tough as boys. they don't come with special paper thin skin and extra breakable bones

Gunny, it is more likely several teams of boys and one team of girls. The opportunity also relates to the number of house of training and the opposition. The better girls have fewer opportunities to play against talented players due to the fact that fewer girls play.

another day- this is so true.

to play for the equivalent skilled girls team my daughter had to play county level. which meant travelling 50 miles each way for training twice a week and 100's of miles for matches. it was completely unmanageable.

football is failing girls.

I agree with a pp that they should start a proper B team.

At these ages they play to win, not just for the sake of playing. I'd bet the two girls are much better than most male players on the main team. It would be a shame if they had to play in a less competitive girls team for the sake of a couple of average boys.
(Mother of a very average boy here)

1sttime

What a load of rubbish!

If your 8.28 post had been your first you would probably would have had people agreeing with you

plastique

I dont think its unfair

However, you are obviously more than entitled to think that it is so in your position i would have a chat with the school and get them to explain it, and maybe see if there would be an interest in a B boys team

GunnyHighway

The entirety of Scouting IS open to boys (& to girls). Girls may also join Girlguiding, a completely separate organisation, that has the provision of "a safe, girl-only space" at its core.

Up until relatively recently it was possible for Scout Groups to only accept boys, but yes, they do now all have to be mixed.

[I realise this has feck-all to do with the matter at hand, I just have a slight....thing...about conflation of Scouting & guiding. And oh, that new-style lower-case "g" actively pains me. Why, WHY have they done that to us...?!]

When children get to year 8 it's all about winning and not the taking part. These boys and girls are trying to make the big time they should all play on a even playing field where they can show of their skills and talent. The fa grassroots program is a load of bollocks for the girls and needs money and improvement. Maybe if the money made its way down from the tv deal the premier league get it may just help but that's another story.

YANBU this set up means that 13 girls will get to compete at football but only 9 boys.

Presuming that the boys team is stronger than the girls team (which it may not be at this age) I'm guessing that the two girls were put in the boys team because they were particularly talented. If this was the case, I think they should have stayed in the girls team where they could be part of raising standards there. How are girls teams ever going to improve if the best girls are siphoned off to temporarily play in the boys teams, which they won't be able to compete in down the line anyway?

ZebraOwl, my apologies I thought the guides etc were party of the scouting movement.

I sick to my original point though, girls ate joining more and more boys organisations while retaining girls only activities. From a male perspective it doesn't seem very fair.

With respect to the football I get it is more likely that a mixed team will be mostly boys and that it can be difficult for the better girls to find competition but again my point remains that there will be 22 spots for girls and only 11 for boys. That is not equal.

And with all the mumsnetters with girls that are better than boys on this thread alone there should be bags of competition.

1sttime.... Your opinion matters, it is just shocking that you think that is acceptable.

gain my point remains that there will be 22 spots for girls and only 11 for boys

In reality though, the majority of the mixed team will be boys. So although the girls can compete for the 22 spots, it will end up with approx 17 girls and 13 boys (assuming a squad of 15). And IME the girls have to be twice as good as the boys to even be considered for the mixed team (although I accept that is not always the case).

So although there is a bias, it's not that big. And over time, if girls are gradually encouraged to play more sport, and from a much earlier age (as boys are), the problem will resolve itself as more talented girls emerge. Unfortunately it means that a couple of boys miss out in the meantime, but it seems a small price to pay if you look at the bigger picture.

That means that girls who are far better than the average girl never really play to their full potential, and less likely to ever go on to achieve great heights in sport.

Why? Women's teams play against women's teams. If a girl is going to go pro, it will be against women.

The solution would be to make sure girls school football is as much of a priority as the boys.

The number of people on here stating that sexism no longer exists because they don't think they have experienced it is quite bewildering. That just isn't how the world works!

we should be aiming for equity not equality in my view. But also this smacks of sore looserism - ie he lost out to two GIRLS - well just maybe they are better...

*That means that girls who are far better than the average girl never really play to their full potential, and less likely to ever go on to achieve great heights in sport.

Why? Women's teams play against women's teams. If a girl is going to go pro, it will be against women*

Because there are far fewer girls playing at a strong competitive level in football than there are boys. Therefore there are less playing at a decent level of ability. Girls who are talented are often not really stretched, sometimes due to a lack of high level of teams at the grass roots stage. This has been recognised by the FA, and is one of the reasons girls are now allowed (and encouraged) to play in mixed teams to the age of 18.

Most likely there were not enough girls so they are doing a mixed team and the girls were better than your son

We are assuming there is one boys team and one girls team. In fact there are usually fewer girls teams than boys. I would love to know how many are involved in this case.