Should I say sth to the football coach about this sub arrangement

[midnightOK]

DS joined a football club since May. He likes football though I have to say his performance is just ok, not great. Everytime he went for a training or match, he would like me to watch him. I rarely got time to watch it. However in these few times I did watch him, he was rarely in the field, was often in the subs. This morning the match started at 12:00, by the time I had to leave, which was 12:30, he was still sitting aside and waiting for his turn to go in the match. Later on when I picked him up, I asked him how long he had been playing, he said probably 10 mins. He might not be accurate about the time he was in the match, however it is clear that some kids were in the match from start to the end and my son was only in it for a very short time. Should I talk about it with the football coach? I don't think this is fair. It's supposed to be roughly equal time for every kid to be in the match, is that right?

Unfortunately football is one of the worst sports for inclusion. Talk to the coach by all means but be prepared for disappointment.

@Kite22

It is FA Guidelines that players should get equal game time at that age. It is non competitive up to U12s

Can you link to that please @Lucyccfc68 as that hasn't been my experience so I tried searching but couldn't find anything that said that.

www.thefa.com/-/media/thefacom-new/files/get-involved/youth-football/youth-football-the-fa-position-statements.ashx

My DS team get equal time to the minute. And fair rotation around attack and defence. They also only get play minutes if they turn up to training.

This means his team is not the most competitive but is very inclusive and my son is learning about more then just football by watching this work:

However, i notice massive variation when you watch the matches of how the other teams work. Many kids come to my sons team after being treat badly at other teams.

So do a little digging and find out whats going on elsewhere too.

Some teams are so competitive the not so good ones get put on 'training only'.

It depends on the type of club they are playing for. If the club are very serious and play lots of competitive tournaments then the coach will have a core team of the strongest players and the rest will be subs and will have to break through to become part of the core. This happens naturally as the older players move up an age grade.
At 11 the more serious players that are hoping to be "spotted" take it incredibly seriously and spend all their time practising skills outside of training. If this is the type of club your ds plays for then I would not approach the coach to ask that he get more playing time.
If it is playing for fun and not really competitive then there is no harm in approaching the coach although I would perhaps say that I could only stay for the part of the match and ask him to put ds on earlier in the match. That way you are gently bringing ds to his attention without questioning his judgement (coaches don't like that).
In my experience the "everyone gets a chance" ethos dies out by the age of 8 as that is when professional clubs start watching players (my ds was approached at age 7).

I would ask some other parents what the rule is regarding subs. Ds plays rugby and the rfu have the half game rule for all players up to u16. I have no idea if football has similar but I would fund out before approaching the coach about it

I have three children who have all played football and have also managed and coached a team. I am an FA qualified coach.

My first son was very enthusiastic but not very good and used to be played for only a few minutes at the end of the game or not at all. I asked him if he wanted to move to a different club but he wanted to stay with his friends. I didn't say anything to the manager but wish that I had - I would now. At the age of 11, he was told that he was no longer wanted for the team as they had recruited some new, better players.

He moved to another, less victory-focused club and played much more, partly because he was no longer the least accomplished player and partly because the coaches were much more aware of giving each player a fair amount of game time.

I eventually took over the team as manager and coach and told all parents and coaches that it would be my aim to give each player at least half a game of playing time. I often had 5 substitutes and was also trying to win games so I had to try not to let the team become too weak or unbalanced - it was more difficult to do than I had expected. We had rolling substitutes so I literally made a chart for each game to make sure that each player got a fair amount of game time. This was not universally liked by the parents - the parents of some of the better players didn't like that their children didn't play more and that we sometimes lost games that we could have won if I had not played the weaker players (the kids were perfectly happy with the system) - but over all it worked well and I was proud to have given boys who loved football but were not great players an opportunity. Ironically, by this point, my son had grown, got faster and stronger and would have played a full game every game if he had stayed with his previous team.

My second son joined a team that stated at the start of each season: "we are trying to win every game and we will pick the team accordingly." My son was one of the fringe players and didn't get to play much but he enjoyed the training and so was content to stay, particularly as he knew at the start of each season what the situation was.

Personally I believe that outside of professional clubs' academies (and that is a whole different world) all sports teams should encourage all players to reach their full potential whatever their ability; unfortunately there are too many parents involved who focus solely on their child and can make the lives of the coaches very uncomfortable, there are too many coaches who don't realise that their main purpose is to allow and encourage their players to benefit from exercise and being part of a team and that winning, whilst an important goal, is secondary to that.

My advice to the OP is to talk to the coach. If the coach says that winning is the priority and the needs of each individual have to cede to that: find another team or sport.

My advice to all other parents is to ask the coach or manager before the start of the season whether they intend to give each player a decent amount of playing time (it doesn't have to be equal for everyone, just more than a token 5 minutes) and then decide whether to join a team based on that information.

I would speak to the coach and club and find out what their take is on it.
My son has been playing for several years and is one of the more talented players in his squad, however, they all get pretty equal game time. Although it’s not meant to be competitive at their age, it’s now starting to become apparent that the other teams who give their best players more time are pushing on much further than my sons team who play everyone equally.

My boys have been involved in grass roots football since they were six, DS1 has now finished and DS2 is 16 and has two years to go.
Some teams will rotate players regardless of ability, some will not. I've seen players travel a fair distance to spend most of the match stood on sideline in the cold. The managers son was captain in one team, and another managers son always plays a full game despite his questionable ability.
As they get older this will only get worse. Even DS1 team which was pretty inclusive, by 13 or 14 the weaker players lost confidence massively as the better ones (and parents) got frustrated. By 15and 16 they'd all gone. By 17 the team consists solely of good skilful strong physical footballers.
Pick your team carefully and even then, be prepared as a weaker player for things to worsen regards game time as leagues become more competitive.

Ide wait until next season. Hes only just started which means he will be fitting in with a team that has played together years.
I do understand how you feel though. It's hard always seeing them on the subs bench.
Ds2 started football about 3/4 years ago and it wasnt until he started his second season there that he started having more playing time in matches.

My son was subbed every home match (goalie) for I reckon 90% of games, and was always selected to play for away matches. Turned out the other goalie's parents refused to take him to away games so my son really got the short straw. Manager refused to see that it wasn't fair that my son sat out 50% of matches but the other kid played every game he went to. Really turned my ds off playing, at which point the manager begged him to rejoin.

When my sons played there were coaches that accepted all the subs for training but never played the boys at matches.

Disgusting behaviour.

Not my sons fortunately as we wouldn't have tolerated it, we would have simply left.

But so unfair for those boys week in, week out, not to get any game time.

There are some awful coaches out there that shouldn't be near children.

I also have an 11yo in football and this seems pretty common for newer boys not to get quite as much time as some of those who have been there longer and are more confident on the pitch. The better players do tend to play longer, but they do get every boy some time.

As he improves and practices more he’s likely to get more playing time.

My friend is a coach of a boys' team and although he tries hard to comply with the directive on equal playing time, it's difficult.

Putting the weaker players on for large portions of the match will cause the team to lose more than they win, which will de-motivate the boys, which means the better ones will move to another team, which makes losing more likely ... so it can become a downward spiral which ends in the team being disbanded due to lack of interest.

My friend didn't really want to be the coach but was begged to do it by the other parents. Those same parents are now sending him emails asking him to justify his selection decisions. He keeps a spreadsheet logging how much game time each boy gets.

He does it because his son is mad keen - the lad struggles with school and football builds his self confidence. Otherwise he'd give up.

Try to be gentle with the coach, OP.

Coaches can't win really. If they take good players off and replace them with poor ones, it demotivates the whole team. The people who were playing well complain, their parents complain. The subs who replace them feel bad for ruining their team's chances.

Guidelines like all players getting an equal time in the game only work if the matches themselves are non-competitive. An hour of play (or whatever they have at that age) but no score being kept, everyone gets equal playing time. If the score is being logged then the best team needs to play.

It's unfair on all the children if inadequate players replace good ones because it gives them false hope. If they spend all their time sitting on the bench it will either make them realise football isn't for them or decide to improve their fitness and their skills so that they can earn a place on the pitch.

It's a tricky one. My ds has worked and trained hard and now always starts matches.This wasn't the case when he started out. He has also moved to a better club each season, this year will be the first time he's stayed at the same one. Personally I think they social side is important and he's coming round to that idea but he just wants to get as good as he can and try new positions out. If your d's doesn't mind I wouldn't make a big deal of ut, although it's disappointing not to get to watch him play

Very common in football where I am at this age, The better kids get more game time, Its way way more competitive than the other sports my kids are involved in.
I honestly wouldn't bother saying anything. This is the soccer ethos it seems, At 12, He probably will spend a lot of time of the sideline anyway if he's not that good and i think you'd embarrass him if you spoke to the coaches.
I'd use it as a life lesson if i could especially if he is better at other sports ie the benefit of enjoying something without having to be the best/you can't be the best at everything etc.
It is hard to watch though.

So in our team the best players get most time on the pitch every match, but those players who aren't as good if chosen will always get at least 20minutes on the pitch. This is Under 13s and it is a lot more competitive at this age.

I should say, this was the same last year when under 12s. But the coach has always made this clear so that if a parent isnt happy with this they can move their child to a less competitive team where they are guaranteed more time on the pitch.

I am just wondering if this is common practice in football

Yes in our experience. The team wants to win so they choose their best players. Your ds needs to find a team playing in a lower league where he will be among the better players.
Unfortunately in our case there were so few teams around that only the very best kids got a chance to play. Teams are all run by volunteers, there are only so many to go round.
It's shit but I don't know what the answer is. Unless you can volunteer to set something up yourself at a lower level.

Just going back to the FA guidance, I'm not aware that it says all under 12 matches must not be competitive, and have equal play time. I think it's under 7s, not under 12s. And I think clubs can make their own decision in terms of offering equal game time, although it's considered preferable to do so.

OP you might find another club with an ethos which better fits what you're after, best of luck

have a turn

This is not how it works at this age, I think he might be better suited to a different team, maybe he should go and have some tries with other local teams.

Also it may not be his sport, at 11 it is OK to drop one thing and focus on another.

are there any less competitive and more "everyone gets a go" type of clubs he could join?

The problem is if they play in a league, or they lose week after week, regardless of what the coach says, the team will know who the weak members are and not want to pass the ball to them, will put pressure on the coach not to play them et etc.

I'm of the opinion that everyone should have access to playing sport if they want to, but i also believe that if there is competition involved and the team wants to do well, that isn't a "sport for all" situation that invites this.

Can you change the times you go to the matches? if your son is going to be on the bench for the foreseeable, you need to be there at the last 20isn minutes of the match which is usually when subs go on.

You don’t have anything to lose by having a conversation with the coach. This happened to one of my SDSs, nearly ended his love of football and cumulated horribly in him being sub for an entire match. I burst into tears when the whistle went and had to take myself off to the car The coaches were 100% for the win, which was completely in breach of the league (YEL) rules. But, we’d also ended up in a team in quite a high division, which pushed the coaches to be competitive.

We luckily found a new team (local club and the league social media have good routes to contacts to help find teams with spaces) in a lower division and they’ve been with the team (now u14s) for probably 3 years and tellingly the team has stayed the same for those years. The kids and parents are really happy with the equal time & rotating position approach the coaches take. The divisions are well matched, so they won’t lose every time. And the coaches have no division winning/division climbing ambitions.

And he’s now a much much stronger and happier player.

Thanks for all your valuable input, I do know more about football now. I used to think that most of kids sports would be about having fun and getting some exercises really, but obviously it's not as simple as that. There are a few clubs near us, which I think I might contact and let DS have a trial. I don't think football is sth really suitable for him, but he is keen to play and I don't want to discourage him to do that. I might just email the coach and ask what DS can do to improve his performance in these matches? That might sound not too bad. I certainly don't want to make the coach's life difficult, but on other hand, I would like DS to have at least more chances in the pitch. I won't expect a perfect equal pitch time, but at least not too short for these weak kids?

If your DS is turning up to all training, has a good attitude and is sufficiently physically fit but still not getting match time, then speak to the coach about whether he is realistically likely to improve enough to make the team. If not, find a club with a team playing in a lower division.

It’s all about finding the right fit. Matches are competitive at that age and coaches run the risk of their better players leaving if results are poor due to playing a weaker team, however much they might want to be fair and inclusive.

As already said, most coaches are volunteers and give up enormous amounts of time for these children. If you’re not happy, by all means raise the issue but if your DS can’t be accommodated at that club, find somewhere more at his level or set up a B team.