Club soccer stuff that drive you nuts...

MacDre said:
What’s your rationale?
Click to expand...

My rationale is that it is embarrassing, it’s not fair the other teams in the bracket and it’s contrary to everything I hope my kids learn from playing sports. On top of that, I’m 100% willing to pay $, travel and give up my weekends to watch my kids compete. No way am I standing around in the heat to watch that display.

If winning some little tournament is the objective why not go big? Just sand bag it and put them in a much lower bracket than they belong in and destroy everyone. Am I right?
 
Surf Zombie said:
My rationale is that it is embarrassing, it’s not fair the other teams in the bracket and it’s contrary to everything I hope my kids learn from playing sports. On top of that, I’m 100% willing to pay $, travel and give up my weekends to watch my kids compete. No way am I standing around in the heat to watch that display.

If winning some little tournament is the objective why not go big? Just sand bag it and put them in a much lower bracket than they belong in and destroy everyone. Am I right?
Click to expand...
I think it’s smart and it took teamwork to accomplish the game strategy. Frankly, I don’t see how it’s embarrassing, unfair, or contrary to what kids learn from playing sports.

Life is unfair and sports are a palatable way of teaching kids that. I also agree that hard work is good but I think smart work is better. Decision making is of utmost importance in soccer. I thinks it’s dumb to risk injury or death playing under adverse conditions to live up to imaginary ideals especially when one has the option not to. So, I’d be proud if my kid had the inner strength to make an unpopular decision because it was arguably the best decision under the circumstances.

My kid is in soccer to be developed in 4 areas: technical, tactical, physical, and mental. I’d argue that the strategy used falls under tactical and mental development. All the kids involved in the tournament now have a new tactical tool in their toolbox and have therefore experienced development. Others are developing mentally by learning to accept that life isn’t fair and that there’s “more than one way to skin a cat.”

Dude, do you realize that by your own admission you want these kids to run around in the heat and risk injury but you are not willing to stand in the heat and watch your kid outwit their opponent...isn’t this a double standard?

Why are y’all so anti-development?
 
MacDre said:
I think it’s smart and it took teamwork to accomplish the game strategy. Frankly, I don’t see how it’s embarrassing, unfair, or contrary to what kids learn from playing sports.

Life is unfair and sports are a palatable way of teaching kids that. I also agree that hard work is good but I think smart work is better. Decision making is of utmost importance in soccer. I thinks it’s dumb to risk injury or death playing under adverse conditions to live up to imaginary ideals especially when one has the option not to. So, I’d be proud if my kid had the inner strength to make an unpopular decision because it was arguably the best decision under the circumstances.

My kid is in soccer to be developed in 4 areas: technical, tactical, physical, and mental. I’d argue that the strategy used falls under tactical and mental development. All the kids involved in the tournament now have a new tactical tool in their toolbox and have therefore experienced development. Others are developing mentally by learning to accept that life isn’t fair and that there’s “more than one way to skin a cat.”

Dude, do you realize that by your own admission you want these kids to run around in the heat and risk injury but you are not willing to stand in the heat and watch your kid outwit their opponent...isn’t this a double standard?

Why are y’all so anti-development?
Click to expand...
agree with a lot that you say but I don’t think they are learning anything tactical. They can’t apply that to another game without the coach’s instruction and permission. The only thing tactically they are learning is how to obey a coach’s instructions which presumably at this level they already know how to do

As for the heat, more of the fault of the tournament for scheduling in the hottest part of the day, or if unavoidable, the teams for putting their players in such conditions in the first place. The assumption (by all parties including the ref btw who in the clip is still running his ass off) is that a game is playable

as for injury it’s also always a risk whenever the players play
 
espola said:
I have seen referees issue cautions for shirts not tucked in, so I admit it can happen. It's still nonsense.

Technical question - who gets the card?
Click to expand...
Arbitrary. But it’s also why a ref wouldn’t do it. Once he issues the first card the other parties have 2 choices: they can play and it’s over, or they push back (whether playing more vigorously but still pretending to play or out right challenging the ref verbally). The options in the latter have the potential to move the game out of the refs control so it’s unlikely a ref would risk it.
 
MacDre said:
I think it’s smart and it took teamwork to accomplish the game strategy. Frankly, I don’t see how it’s embarrassing, unfair, or contrary to what kids learn from playing sports.

Life is unfair and sports are a palatable way of teaching kids that. I also agree that hard work is good but I think smart work is better. Decision making is of utmost importance in soccer. I thinks it’s dumb to risk injury or death playing under adverse conditions to live up to imaginary ideals especially when one has the option not to. So, I’d be proud if my kid had the inner strength to make an unpopular decision because it was arguably the best decision under the circumstances.

My kid is in soccer to be developed in 4 areas: technical, tactical, physical, and mental. I’d argue that the strategy used falls under tactical and mental development. All the kids involved in the tournament now have a new tactical tool in their toolbox and have therefore experienced development. Others are developing mentally by learning to accept that life isn’t fair and that there’s “more than one way to skin a cat.”

Dude, do you realize that by your own admission you want these kids to run around in the heat and risk injury but you are not willing to stand in the heat and watch your kid outwit their opponent...isn’t this a double standard?

Why are y’all so anti-development?
Click to expand...

It was match fixing. Which is cheating. Which everyone agrees is wrong, except, apparently, a few posters on this board who see nothing wrong with it.

What we don't know is WHY Carlsbad would agree to this. To risk expulsion from the event and loss of reputation just to get a day off seems like an odd decision. You most often see this match fixing scenario when both teams are at risk of not advancing, but go through with a draw, like the TFA/Texans game at Surf Cup. Ambassadors could have parked the bus, Carlsbad could give low-effort to avoid injury, and we wouldn't be talking about it 5 years later. So, they came to an agreement that Carlsbad and Ambassadors go to the semifinals, and New York does not. Cheating. Which to you, MacDre, is "development". LOL
 
GLangevinito said:
It was match fixing. Which is cheating. Which everyone agrees is wrong, except, apparently, a few posters on this board who see nothing wrong with it.

What we don't know is WHY Carlsbad would agree to this. To risk expulsion from the event and loss of reputation just to get a day off seems like an odd decision. You most often see this match fixing scenario when both teams are at risk of not advancing, but go through with a draw, like the TFA/Texans game at Surf Cup. Ambassadors could have parked the bus, Carlsbad could give low-effort to avoid injury, and we wouldn't be talking about it 5 years later. So, they came to an agreement that Carlsbad and Ambassadors go to the semifinals, and New York does not. Cheating. Which to you, MacDre, is "development". LOL
Click to expand...
What is your definition of match fixing? I associate match fixing with gambling and throwing matches for financial gain none of which was present here.
 
GLangevinito said:
It was match fixing. Which is cheating. Which everyone agrees is wrong, except, apparently, a few posters on this board who see nothing wrong with it.

What we don't know is WHY Carlsbad would agree to this. To risk expulsion from the event and loss of reputation just to get a day off seems like an odd decision. You most often see this match fixing scenario when both teams are at risk of not advancing, but go through with a draw, like the TFA/Texans game at Surf Cup. Ambassadors could have parked the bus, Carlsbad could give low-effort to avoid injury, and we wouldn't be talking about it 5 years later. So, they came to an agreement that Carlsbad and Ambassadors go to the semifinals, and New York does not. Cheating. Which to you, MacDre, is "development". LOL
Click to expand...
While I think its kinda lame the manner in which the teams "played" the game, those two teams earned the right to play for a tie based on their performance in previous games. Both teams had control of their own destiny. Unless Vegas had a line on this game, I agree with MacDre that I don't see how this equates to match fixing.

Would I be bummed if my kid's team did this? Yes. Would I be bummed if two other teams did this and kept my kid's team out of a final? Yes. Would I make a scene and post a video on Youtube? No. Those teams earned that right. Not to justify it, but it is not that rare for this to happen, but its usually done in a more discrete manner.
 
To all of those that watched the video, did the video include the beginning of the game and the injury? Were any of you there? I was there. I saw the beginning of the game, I saw the injury, I saw the effect it had on the players. At the restart the players had already decided to slow the game down, both sides. Within a minute of the restart, both teams dialed it back completely. They were under no obligation to please any of you. USYS did not sanction either team, even though the NY parents made sure the tournament directors were on the sideline. One of the negative things about all of the media coverage was the derogatory comments by adults directed at the younger Carlsbad teams.
 
Surf Zombie said:
If winning some little tournament is the objective why not go big? Just sand bag it and put them in a much lower bracket than they belong in and destroy everyone. Am I right?
Click to expand...
Do you even know what tournament this was and the context in which it was played? From you comment, I don't think you know what you are talking about. There were no lower brackets. There was no bigger tournament. It was the USYS National Championships, before GDA. It was played at in Frisco, Texas in July.
 
El Clasico said:
That is pretty bold.
Click to expand...

Bold, yes, but interesting too (insert Irish Spring whistle). Interesting in that the "not getting futbol" post was accompanied by a separate thread to compare/contrast/discuss the whole situation. If the statement had been "You guys just don't get club soccer" I would have said you are probably right. At the beginning of "Inverting the Pyramid" Jonathan Wilson writes "In the beginning, there was chaos and soccer was without form". The cynic in me wants to have the second sentence be "Then parents created something called club soccer so they could compete against one another using their children as proxies". But clearly that is just a part of it.

Getting ready for his senior year of high school and contemplating what's next, my son is like soccer needs to be part of it. Back in Ulittle I used to think the answers to "what's development" and "what are we developing all these kids for" would basically just involve positive life lessons, blah blah blah. But it turns out to be more visceral than that. And having not played the game myself growing up it is possible I will never be able to truly "get futbol". Perhaps "getting fubol" does involve developing an appreciation of how some games can be simply meaningless, deserving of being played with non-effort to achieve a non-result for strategic reasons to advance in a tournament. But I suspect getting fubol is a deeper dive than that.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
Bold, yes, but interesting too (insert Irish Spring whistle). Interesting in that the "not getting futbol" post was accompanied by a separate thread to compare/contrast/discuss the whole situation. If the statement had been "You guys just don't get club soccer" I would have said you are probably right. At the beginning of "Inverting the Pyramid" Jonathan Wilson writes "In the beginning, there was chaos and soccer was without form". The cynic in me wants to have the second sentence be "Then parents created something called club soccer so they could compete against one another using their children as proxies". But clearly that is just a part of it.

Getting ready for his senior year of high school and contemplating what's next, my son is like soccer needs to be part of it. Back in Ulittle I used to think the answers to "what's development" and "what are we developing all these kids for" would basically just involve positive life lessons, blah blah blah. But it turns out to be more visceral than that. And having not played the game myself growing up it is possible I will never be able to truly "get futbol". Perhaps "getting fubol" does involve developing an appreciation of how some games can be simply meaningless, deserving of being played with non-effort to achieve a non-result for strategic reasons to advance in a tournament. But I suspect getting fubol is a deeper dive than that.
Click to expand...

“getting futbol” is difficult for Americans to understand because less than lacrosse, water polo, or even futsal, it’s not really a game about scoring. It’s a game about mistakes and punishing mistakes when your opponent has made them. It has tactically more in common with speed chess than gridiron football. The ideal soccer game is a zero zero draw with no mistakes made...what’s weird about this scenario is it’s an artificial way of creating that because neither side is really trying hence mistakes can’t happen. Tactically smart chess but makes for a boring match.
 
Or perhaps I should say disagree with the first part in the context of a philosophy of play. Having a 0-0 draw as a hard fought outcome is different than purposefully trying to achieve it as a non-result.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
Or perhaps I should say disagree with the first part in the context of a philosophy of play. Having a 0-0 draw as a hard fought outcome is different than purposefully trying to achieve it as a non-result.
Click to expand...
A 4-4-2 formation is “different” from a 4-3–3 formation. The fact that the tactics are different doesn’t matter. What matters is that it is an additional tactical tool. Why limit the tools in the toolbox?
 
I don't think anybody is saying a 0-0 draw cannot be entertaining, fascinating, etc. And given its July 4, I don't think having a dim view of a 0-0 draw achieved because two teams find the game meaningless is just an ugly-Americanism. Its just ugly.
 
MacDre said:
A 4-4-2 formation is “different” from a 4-3–3 formation. The fact that the tactics are different doesn’t matter. What matters is that it is an additional tactical tool. Why limit the tools in the toolbox?
Click to expand...

Again, whatever lineup a team chooses to play reflects their system to play. And good teams can switch between more defensive or offensive systems as the situation dictates. Choosing NOT to meaningfully play as a tactic is, in my view, something qualitatively separate from that. It reflects a difference in how a team philosophically approaches the matches in which they play. Obviously, YMMV.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
Or perhaps I should say disagree with the first part in the context of a philosophy of play. Having a 0-0 draw as a hard fought outcome is different than purposefully trying to achieve it as a non-result.
Click to expand...
Mexico vs Brazil. World Cup 2014. One of the greatest games out there. Score? 0-0. The objective for Mexico was to advance to the next round. Not to be annihilated by Brazil at their own home by trying to score. The tactic was to hold and invalidate Brazil's advances and then, if they made mistakes, counterattack. Brazil didn't make any defensive mistakes.

That's how you play a tournament. Knowing the context, the opposite team, their strengths, the other teams' chances in your same bracket, etc.That's futbol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top