I completely understand this but that is the current climate we are in. To change the process we need to change our thinking and if it is an initiative that all have to follow then there won't be such uproar. Currently the playstation coaches who tell their players everything to do will get results over the ones sitting back and letting them play and as results are tracked this causes the discontent with parents. If all coaches sat back and said nothing in games, only before, half time and end then you will really start to see which ones are good trainers as the players will show what they are taught in practice without constantly being told what to do
Agree it would require changing the climate, but I think getting people to abandon the competitive model would be difficult. The U.S. soccer recommendations to reduce competitiveness at the younger ages have been widely ignored (they made them recommendations instead of mandates, and they were treated as such). The pendulum has also culturally swung hard from the Millenial everyone-gets-a-trophy days to the hypercompetitive iGeneration . I've made the point before: U.S. Soccer takes all these initiatives and wants to try and emphasize development over winning, we criticize the parents for following "winning coaches", but then we build a system where winning seems to be very important (whether for rankings, ascension, tournaments, or medals), then we act all surprised the parents are chasing the teams that kickball and win. I would see too much of a blowback: "that's what pickup is for" or "go back to AYSO".