Jacob’s soccer team won again today. They only had eight players show up so they had to play short handed against nine players. They have a very good front line and won by a score of 6 to 2 keeping their perfect record intact.
The team plays in the North Bangkok Soccer League. The players are mostly from ISB but other kids do play. The kids sign up and the league assigns them teams. Jacob’s team, Polyplus has only eleven players. Some teams have twelve while others have eleven. Each team is supposed to field nine players for a game. Unfortunately Jacob’s team often has trouble getting a full compliment of players to the game. Today eight showed up sometimes its seven and sometimes its nine. There might have been one game where all eleven showed up
Most of the other teams understand the dynamics of what’s going on. A few weeks ago when only seven players showed up the other coach (aka “Mr. Reasonable”) agreed that they would play seven on seven. It wasn’t a problem.
Apparently not all coaches see it that way. There are some coaches like the one we played against today (aka “Mr. Win at All Cost”) who think a sure forfeit win is much better than playing a game. Earlier this week, Mr. Reasonable called Steve and told him that they had played against Mr. Win at All cost. Mr. Reasonable’s team only had seven players make it to the game. Mr. Reasonable talked to Mr. Win at All Cost before the game expecting that they would be able to play a seven on seven game. Mr. Win at All Cost refused refusing to play at all unless Mr. Reasonable’s team forfeited the game. Mr. Reasonable relented and forfeited the game.
Here is the best part. Not satisfied with having won the “official” game, Mr. Win at All Cost played nine players against the other team’s seven in the fun game they played. Even though the game did not count for anything he felt the need to have a two person advantage. His team actually trailed most of the game but tied it up at the end.
I could understand if he had agreed to let them play an official game but retained the right to play his nine players against the other team’s seven. At least then the game being played had some meaning. Let’s put aside the feelings of the other team for a second and just examine his own team. If his team beat another team while enjoying a two person advantage its a pretty hollow victory. The kids are stupid they know that it wasn’t a fair game. If his team loses or even ties they couldn’t beat a team even with a two person advantage.
So today Mr. Win at All Cost came up to Steve who told him that he had to forfeit since he had only eight players. Steve said that he wouldn’t forfeit the game and played eight on nine. I don’t know if Mr. Win at All Cost will petition the league or some such nonsense but I’ll guess we will see. Interestingly this is the second time that we played this team. The first time Mr. Win at All Cost was away so a friend of mine coached the game. It was after a huge rain and the field was like a swamp.
The whole thing reminded me a bit of basketball this past season. In the tournament Jacob’s team played in the championship game but lost. The winning team had a boy that from my observation was clearly the best player in the league. He was probably the only 3rd or 4th grader who could handle the ball very well with both hands. The kids was a decent size and had a nice shot.
I don’t know what the official rules were for the basketball teams but I know that in virtually every game I saw the coaches rotated the kids in and out. While the league is competitive it is still instructional. between ten and fifteen points. If they scored only nine points in three quarters they would have had to score thirteen in the final quarter while holding the other team scoreless. That was not going to happen. Even if they were able to cut the lead while the other team’s best player was on the bench the coach could simply put him back in to stem the tide.
The kids who were most disadvantaged by the kid playing the entire game wasn’t Jacob’s team. By the beginning and certainly by the mid point of the fourth quarter the outcome of the game was already determined. The kids most affected were the boy’s teammates. Its not that putting him on the bench would have allowed someone else to play that much more in the game but rather they would get to do more in the game. As is often the case when a team has one stand out player that person ends up with the ball a lot. This boy did most of the ball handling and shooting. He probably had the ball in his hands eighty percent of the time it was in his team’s possession.
I’m not saying that he was a ball hog but sometimes when you have someone really good on your team other players end up relying on them. They don’t have to try as hard.
If he had sat on the bench for a little while his teammates would have had more opportunities to shoot and handle the ball. They would have had to step up their own play. They would have gotten better as a team. Its kind of disappointing that they didn’t get that chance.
When the kids get to middle school and beyond I think things will and should change. At that point I expect it will get more competitive and there will be a greater focus on winning.
Certainly by the later years of middle school (if not the early ones) there will be less emphasis on making sure everyone gets to play and more on putting the best team on the field or court. Oh one last thing. Lest you think that these are all over competitive fathers. The basketball coach was a mom.
No comments:
Post a Comment