Lopsided Scores

[zebrafish]

Having played multiple high school sports in a private prep school, I know that public schools would constantly "gun" for trying to lay the beat-down on the privileged rich kids. Not all of us were rich, but it certainly was a motivating factor.

I wonder if this also plays into this phenomenon-- the clubs with less-- less club status, less socioeconomic clout, less trendy zip code, less buzz-- whatever-- derive pleasure out of pummeling those with "more".

I've seen one of my kid's games where the coach is literally shaking down parents before a game for money to pay the ref, then he piles on the score -- as if to say "look at how good I am" while the parents all laugh and clap as their team goes up 10+ goals. Then everyone can go home and say, our club beat the so-and-so club. This was one of the lower points in my kid's soccer experience.

 

[espola]

In the futsal league my daughter played in, they had a man-down rule for lopsided scores.
If you went up by a certain margin, you lose a player.
If that margin increased, you lose a second player.
Keeps games from getting to out of hand.

Or add players for the team behind in the score. More playing time for everyone.

 

[Sped]

I've noticed the same this year. I think it's the age change. Just no idea where to put some of these new teams, particularly at the larger clubs. My kid's team has won and lost games by big spreads this year and they're a pretty decent squad.

 

[gauchosean]

This has been an issue at U-Littles forever, some teams are way better and some are not ready for club soccer competitiveness. Most coaches get it and will slow their team down once they reach a certain point. A few don't and they will get theirs eventually. The older the kids get the less there are blow-outs as teams get segregated by ability and gap narrows between the haves and have-nots. You don't have to like it but its going to happen as long as you line up little kids and play for trophies.

My oldest boy aged out last year, if you ask him about being blown out in a summer tournament at u9, he won't remember it (I do). What he does remember was the supersoaker fight back at the hotel pool with his teammates after the game. Life lessons well learned.

 

[TangoCity]

Suspend coach for a week for every goal differential above 10.

 

[forsomuch]

Suspend coach for a week for every goal differential above 10.

So long as you also suspend coaches for entering their team in tournaments they can't be competitive in. Let's face it kicking your team's butt by 10+ goals is waste of their time and tournament fees as well. When you enter a tournament you are not prepared to compete in you are doing a disservice not only to your team but to the other teams that have to play them.

 

[Wez]

Suspend coach for a week for every goal differential above 10.

Really? So you play your whole bench and force 10 touches before a shot and you still want to suspend the coach? Cmon, get real.

Blame a no mercy rule, don't blame the kids and coach. The game is as much about the winning teams development as it is the losing. At some point, the kids after playing keep away for several minutes are going to have a shot opportunity. How does it help the losing team to make the game so artificial as to not resemble soccer anymore?

I do agree with taking kids away or adding kids to the losing side, but sometimes it's just not going to matter.

 

[lancer]

My DD was a guest this weekend for another team in her club. She was playing a year up and a flight down. The first two games were competitive, but the semi final was a total blow out. It was a flight 3 bracket but their opponent was clearly sandbagging. Even after going up 7 - 0 the coach still had the pedal down. The sandbaggers went on to win the final 5 - 0. A quick search on SCDSL listed the team at flight 2 for the last two years.

Why not join a rec tournament? Is anyone going to play in the JUSA friendship tournament this year?

 

[TangoCity]

Really? So you play your whole bench and force 10 touches before a shot and you still want to suspend the coach? Cmon, get real.

Blame a no mercy rule, don't blame the kids and coach. The game is as much about the winning teams development as it is the losing. At some point, the kids after playing keep away for several minutes are going to have a shot opportunity. How does it help the losing team to make the game so artificial as to not resemble soccer anymore?

I do agree with taking kids away or adding kids to the losing side, but sometimes it's just not going to matter.

Huh!? You don't even have to shoot one time to develop. Just go play keep away once the score gets out of hand. That is what good teams do at practice anyways. They play keep away. Challenge yourself to see how many passes you can connect in a row. When you lose it start over again. Spread the field - move the ball around - no need to go to goal anymore. You've already done that.

 

[Wez]

Huh!? You don't even have to shoot one time to develop. Just go play keep away once the score gets out of hand. That is what good teams do at practice anyways. They play keep away. Challenge yourself to see how many passes you can connect in a row. When you lose it start over again. Spread the field - move the ball around - no need to go to goal anymore. You've already done that.

So a pass to a forward just gets tapped backward every time? Does a keeper who doesn't get shot on get to develop? I understand the spirit of what you are saying, I just don't agree with the execution on field.

If the game must be altered that dramatically, then just get real and gather the other coach and refs and agree to end the game early. No need to create such an artificial situation that doesn't serve to develop either team.

 

[TangoCity]

So a pass to a forward just gets tapped backward every time? I understand the spirit of what you are saying, I just don't agree with the execution on field. If the game must be altered that dramatically, then just get real and gather the other coach and refs and agree to end the game early. No need to create such an artificial situation that doesn't serve to develop either team.

It is not a good situation. But this option is better (imo) than running up the score 18-0. As the score gets out of hand, connect X number of passes before going to goal. It is good practice to try to keep possession, even from a less skilled team. Can also limit touches to two for each player. There are ways to manage this and still get development out of it. A "good" coach knows how to do this.

 

[ajaffe]

Yes, I have. But so what?

But even if not-- does fear of the opponent scoring really justify winning 10-0, 15-0 or by some ridiculous score?

And if you lose points for giving up a shutout-- is it really that much more important than grinding a bunch of 9/10 year old opponents into the ground? Doesn't that on some level make you feel kind of bad? Aren't there more important issues at play than just winning? If your parents/coach think it is all about the win or points, then they've lost perspective.

I agree that no parent of an opposing team will forget it, which could easily cost you in ways you don't see.

But beyond this, don't you have some greater responsibility to teach the game in the right way?

You're confusing my reply with things that I actually do. I don't pile on. I am simply saying that the justification of securing the 1-point for shutout is why some coaches would keep going to goal. I have seen a team get bounced from a tournament by that 1 point margin or by goal differential because another team piled it on.

 

[espola]

You're confusing my reply with things that I actually do. I don't pile on. I am simply saying that the justification of securing the 1-point for shutout is why some coaches would keep going to goal. I have seen a team get bounced from a tournament by that 1 point margin or by goal differential because another team piled it on.

If tournaments adjusted their tie-breaker rules so that the tiebreaker "most goals scored" had a limit like 4 goals per game that would reduce the incentive. Or they could add some of the penalty rules we have been discussing here.

 

[Socal United]

If tournaments adjusted their tie-breaker rules so that the tiebreaker "most goals scored" had a limit like 4 goals per game that would reduce the incentive. Or they could add some of the penalty rules we have been discussing here.

I think sometimes this is harder than people think. I coach the Ulittles at my club and have had some exceptional teams. That said, my kids are very aware of what my rules are in that I make sure they know early on that they won't be piling on. I try to live by an 8-0 rule as the limit to where they can go. I have had a few instances that make you question what to do. First, a few years back we got up and were 8-0 at half. The kids knew the deal, so they went out and played possession. After about 5 minutes of the other team chasing the ball to no avail, some of the kids on the other team just walked off. I heard "this is boring" amongst other things. I genuinely felt bad for the kids. On the other side, we got up 8-0 about 9 minutes into a league game. We passed around for the remainder of the half, but by then the kids were over it. Luckily, the other coach was a great guy as well as the ref. The coach sat and talked to his team about working to the end no matter the score. The three of us got together and he told me to not stop scoring, to let the kids play. I begged the ref, even though he was not supposed to, to look the other way in regards to numbers. They put 10 on the field, we played with 6. I think we won 6-2 in the second half, but the kids all ran and worked the entire time. I know not ideal, or even really "legal" but it turned out great. This year, I have been on the other side and have had some coaches that refuse to slow down and some that do a great job of trying to make it as palatable as possible.

 

[Laced]

The other side of the coin is for kids to learn to handle losing. Even when it's lopsided. They get their cues from parents in such situations. When all parents do is to point fingers, they learn to blame everyone else for their losses. Hardly a lesson you want your kids to learn.

 

[zebrafish]

The other side of the coin is for kids to learn to handle losing. Even when it's lopsided. They get their cues from parents in such situations. When all parents do is to point fingers, they learn to blame everyone else for their losses. Hardly a lesson you want your kids to learn.

I don't think people on the other side of this argument are asking the better team to lose on purpose. I also don't see people suggesting making excuses for the worse team-- clearly everyone understands that the weaker team is weaker.

I've been on the coaching side of many games where I could have crushed the opposition 20+ to nothing, but I didn't.

I think the point is that winning and losing teams can learn more out of a properly c0ached/managed game that is 5/6/7 to nothing score rather than a 15 to nothing score. I think this is what these coaches/parents are missing, and missing in a big way.

 

[Laced]

I don't think people on the other side of this argument are asking the better team to lose on purpose.

Who said anything about losing on purpose? Where did you get that idea?

Kids are much less affected by lopsided losses than their parents. I have yet to hear a kid quit the game as a result. It's usually the parents who get worked up as evidenced on this forum.