Parents of 10yo Girl Not Happy With Their Soccer Coach--Your Thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[El Floppo]

Holy #### these people have some serious time on their hands.

goodposting

Everybody has a "right" to be offended by anything that offends them. The mom was concerned for her kid so did what she thought was right. We all agree it was wrong, and your brother told her off in the moment. I don't understand why the wife isn't writing the email, but maybe she felt "threatened" by chet's brother (through the wires, somehow), so I don't have a problem with the hustband writing on her behalf. Your brother has too much time on his hands to write that much of a response... but what the hell- he made himself as crystal clear as he possibly could have in his repetition and redundancy.

So- it sounds like it was the manner in which the mom got involved more than the involvement that pissed your brother off... that she was rude or aggressive. Or maybe your brother was just waiting for this kind of altercation with a helicopter/too-invovled parent- his letter made it sound like that, that he had no patience for this (don't blame him). I don't have a problem with him telling the mom off in the moment- but even though he's in the absolute right here over his actions... his letter should have included a statement along the lines of "I'm sorry your wife felt threatened/offended/whatever" along with the rest o his explanation. This would help defray further issues with the family and make them feel more a part of the team than just explaining why the wife is in the wrong.

Hopefully the wfie has learned her lesson though- and I can't imagine the embarrassment the 10yo daughter must be feeling

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I would suggest that is the type of coaching philosophy that is at the root of the problems with youth sports.

Requiring kids who sign up to play soccer to, you know, play soccer is the type of coaching philosophy that is at the root of the problems with youth sports?

OK a bit hyperbolic. How about-- if you are writing 3000 word emails defending forcing a 10-year-old to play a position she doesn't want to, maybe you should re-evaluate certain aspects of your coaching philosophy.

Number of girls who wanted to play goalie on his team, as he said about 17 times in his email: ZERO.

So his options were: A. Force a girl to play goalie who didn't want to or B. Cancel the season.

Sometimes in life you have to do things you don't want to. They're usually not as bad as you think they'll be. That's a great lesson to learn and the girls are probably better off for it.

Yeah, but tdog is right that even if no girls want to play goalie, some girls are more averse to it than others. 10 year old girls rec league, at least where I live, is tricky business. As far as I know there isn't any coach in my league who has a similar policy to chet's brother.

 

[nysfl2]

I would suggest that is the type of coaching philosophy that is at the root of the problems with youth sports.

Requiring kids who sign up to play soccer to, you know, play soccer is the type of coaching philosophy that is at the root of the problems with youth sports?

OK a bit hyperbolic. How about-- if you are writing 3000 word emails defending forcing a 10-year-old to play a position she doesn't want to, maybe you should re-evaluate certain aspects of your coaching philosophy.

Number of girls who wanted to play goalie on his team, as he said about 17 times in his email: ZERO.

So his options were: A. Force a girl to play goalie who didn't want to or B. Cancel the season.

Sometimes in life you have to do things you don't want to. They're usually not as bad as you think they'll be. That's a great lesson to learn and the girls are probably better off for it.

Yeah, but tdog is right that even if no girls want to play goalie, some girls are more averse to it than others. 10 year old girls rec league, at least where I live, is tricky business. As far as I know there isn't any coach in my league who has a similar policy to chet's brother.

I've coached 10 year old girls rec leagues, and pretty much every coach in the league has that exact same policy, whether they have a girl or two who likes playing goalie, or not. It's good for the kids at that age to play all positions, and see what they're good at.

I've yet to find one that is traumatized for life by the experience. It's not like they're taking shots from Ronaldo out there. Several have actually discovered that they either enjoy it, or are pretty good at it.

 

[DiStefano]

The coach has a dumb policy. He assumes all kids dislike the position at the same rate and therefore it is fair only if all share equally in covering the position. So the girl that dislikes the position is treated the same as the girl that has a debilitating anxiety attack at the thought of being placed in that position. So she quits because she is not "tough enough" to handle it at 10 years old. I would suggest that is the type of coaching philosophy that is at the root of the problems with youth sports.

Thank you for sharing.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

There will be some kids that don't want to be there at all.. To assume the coach's policy is inappropriate because he can't successfully get 1 of 20 (or so) girls to like playing goalie, is absurd..

 

[mr roboto]

I bet tdog puts all the blame on teachers in bad schools for not motivating the students better.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

"Traumatizing kids for life" isn't likely, but that seems to me to be far too high a threshold. I just want the kids to keep playing soccer. None of the kids on my team are going to get a college scholarship, few of them really has a chance to play in high school. Rec league is really just about getting kids to run around and have fun, in my opinion.

My view may be different because we have a lot of different levels of soccer here. Pretty much every kid I've had with real serious talent or interest has gone to a travel team or the more advanced league.

 

[tdog]

I bet tdog puts all the blame on teachers in bad schools for not motivating the students better.

If you get your kicks by making 10 year old kids cry as your coaching hobby, then good for you. I was trying to point out that some kids react in an out-sized irrational manner to adverse situations like this one and perhaps the bat crazy reaction of this parent was because her kid has a real problem. I know this from years of coaching girls and having a girl or two every year that has some unexplained melt down for no apparent reason. It seems to always then result in the parent sharing some terrible psychological issue the kids has and pleading with me to find a way for that girl to have a place on the team because she is afraid to play everything else. It would be nice if the parents shared those problems beforehand but they never do. In my case, the softball gods are not going to strike us down because little Susie wouldn't put on the catching gear or Jane was too scared of line drives to play pitcher.

If you have an upset kid, it's your job as coach to figure out why, determine whether you should push because they just need some confidence and skills to handle it, or give them some allowance because they can't. I can't imagine figuring that out without talking to the parents.

If the kid is a lazy brat and the parents obnoxious, then the response is simply, "find another team."

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

 

[fatness]

tdog and pots, the only 2 siding with the parent.

Each week we ask all the posters "Who wants to defend dumb opinions?" As with most weeks, this week we got no volunteers. I then ask all posters "Who has not already defended dumb opinions in one of our threads?" This week two posters raised their hand - tdog and pots. So it was their turn to defend dumb opinions in this topic. Please understand that none of the posters who have been asked to defend dumb opinions were happy about it. This year alone, I have seen posters crying as well as posters shaking with fear and yet they still needed to defend dumb opinions because:


1) It is what the team required of them.
2) It was their turn.

 

[bigbottom]

I was trying to point out that some kids react in an out-sized irrational manner to adverse situations like this one and perhaps the bat crazy reaction of this parent was because her kid has a real problem. I know this from years of coaching girls and having a girl or two every year that has some unexplained melt down for no apparent reason. It seems to always then result in the parent sharing some terrible psychological issue the kids has and pleading with me to find a way for that girl to have a place on the team because she is afraid to play everything else.

That is obviously not the case here given that the girl's own father (1) agreed with the coach's approach of having every girl play goal for one half of a game; and (2) agreed with the coach's decision to put his daughter in goal. And this after the daughter had already played (there was nothing I read to indicate that there was a "meltdown"). If there was some psychological trauma at issue, the dad would not have made it a point to agree with and support the coach's decisions after the fact.

It would be nice if the parents shared those problems beforehand but they never do.

The parents had ample opportunity to raise concerns with the coach when he communicated the rule to them weeks prior at the beginning of the season. The coach did what he could to open the dialogue on any issues that the kids may have had. The parents' failure to say something is 100% on the parents if there was an issue that needed to be raised. Bringing it up in middle of the game during play is too late, and that's on the parents.

If you have an upset kid, it's your job as coach to figure out why, determine whether you should push because they just need some confidence and skills to handle it, or give them some allowance because they can't.

That's precisely what he did.

Over the years, as a coach, I have put a lot of players in unfamiliar and uncomfortable positions. This helps to push them and get the most out of them. I believed in my heart that xxxxx was up to the task, but that she needed to be pushed. I was watching her and her demeanor throughout the second half. If I felt that she needed to be moved out of goal (because she had lost her confidence), then I would have done so and put my own daughter there.

I can't imagine figuring that out without talking to the parents.

He did talk to the parents. He knew that no one on the team wanted to play goalie. So at the beginning of the season, he communicated his planned approach to all the parents. He talked to the parents. It was the parents who didn't talk to him. And that's on the parents, not the coach.

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

Public fits like, say, during the middle of a soccer game?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I bet tdog puts all the blame on teachers in bad schools for not motivating the students better.

If you get your kicks by making 10 year old kids cry as your coaching hobby, then good for you. I was trying to point out that some kids react in an out-sized irrational manner to adverse situations like this one and perhaps the bat crazy reaction of this parent was because her kid has a real problem. I know this from years of coaching girls and having a girl or two every year that has some unexplained melt down for no apparent reason. It seems to always then result in the parent sharing some terrible psychological issue the kids has and pleading with me to find a way for that girl to have a place on the team because she is afraid to play everything else. It would be nice if the parents shared those problems beforehand but they never do. In my case, the softball gods are not going to strike us down because little Susie wouldn't put on the catching gear or Jane was too scared of line drives to play pitcher.

If you have an upset kid, it's your job as coach to figure out why, determine whether you should push because they just need some confidence and skills to handle it, or give them some allowance because they can't. I can't imagine figuring that out without talking to the parents.

If the kid is a lazy brat and the parents obnoxious, then the response is simply, "find another team."

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

A half game in net isn't going to be the end of the world. It's inappropriate for a parent to attempt to dictate a child's position on the field. That's the coaches job. The alternate to a fair and equatable rotation is the coach playing the children in the best position he sees fit to play each child in, and there will always be children and parents to disagree with that plan as well. At the end of the day, the children and/or parents do not run the team, and everyone has to do things in life that they don't want to do. It's just a half game, suck it up and move on.. Absolutely no reason to attack the coaches decision in this case, especially if he explained this rotation at the beginning of the season and no one disagreed. The parent was completely out of line for approaching the coach during the game.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong. The father's email even admitted that he was fine with the coaches decision. The coach then spends an hour writing up an email explaining his decision that the father already conceded to.

I have a feeling that the coach must have acted like a real ### when he was approached on the sideline. The fact that he doesn't even throw in an apology in the return email leads me to beleive he is a bully that cannot admit he may have over reacted on the sideline.

When I first read this I completely sided with the coach, but thinking about it more, I can see that the coach is more interested in being right instead of trying to diffuse the situation. That email will probably lead to the parents pulling their child.

 

[tdog]

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

Public fits like, say, during the middle of a soccer game?

Yes just like that. Both parties let the kid down. Sorry I did not say that in easier terms for you.

 

[Christo]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I need to see pics here before I make any judgments. I need a face shot, full body shot, also separate shots focused on chest, butt, and legs. I will also need to know how the mother was dressed. My initial impulse is to completely side with the Coach. If, however, the mother is a scorching hot sex kitten of a MILF, well then I think the coach might have suggested an in person mediation session with the mother. Sort of like Momma Gump negotiating with the Principal on getting Forrest into regular classes.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

As I stated, I need to see the incident. Was the coach loud and vocal in his admonishment of the parent? Did the 10 year old girls see this incident? Was it uncomfortable for all the other parents?

I can't give the coach a free pass if he acted like a DB just because a parent approached him. I coach a girls 10 year old rep fastpitch team and I understand that parent involvement can be a problem. But that doesn't give me license to act innapropriately (if that was the case).

 

[bigbottom]

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

Public fits like, say, during the middle of a soccer game?

Yes just like that. Both parties let the kid down. Sorry I did not say that in easier terms for you.

How did the coach let the kid down? Be sure to show your work (because each point you raised previously was easily refuted).Note: even the dad doesn't think the coach let his kid down.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

As I stated, I need to see the incident. Was the coach loud and vocal in his admonishment of the parent? Did the 10 year old girls see this incident? Was it uncomfortable for all the other parents?I can't give the coach a free pass if he acted like a DB just because a parent approached him. I coach a girls 10 year old rep fastpitch team and I understand that parent involvement can be a problem. But that doesn't give me license to act innapropriately (if that was the case).

I actually agree with this. On the surface, I tend to side with the coach, and I think his email was fine. But it's hard for me to definitively side with anyone without knowing what was said on the sideline. There's no place for a parent to approach the coach mid-game on the sideline, but without knowing the coach's reply, it's hard to know whether the parent was the only one at fault, or if they both were.

 

[Ilov80s]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

Suppose the coach said, "sit down titty stick, I coach with my balls and my balls say your kid is in the net today. If you don't like my the way my balls are coaching this 10 year old girls rec soccer league, then you can suck them." Coach then slipped his scrotum through one leg of his shorts to reveal a rope tied around them in an overhand knot that held up a whistle?

Does that change things a bit?

 

[Christo]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

Suppose the coach said, "sit down titty stick, I coach with my balls and my balls say your kid is in the net today. If you don't like my the way my balls are coaching this 10 year old girls rec soccer league, then you can suck them." Coach then slipped his scrotum through one leg of his shorts to reveal a rope tied around them in an overhand knot that held up a whistle?

Does that change things a bit?

Wouldn't have happened if she'd just kept her trap shut. I'll allow it.

 

[Ilov80s]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

Suppose the coach said, "sit down titty stick, I coach with my balls and my balls say your kid is in the net today. If you don't like my the way my balls are coaching this 10 year old girls rec soccer league, then you can suck them." Coach then slipped his scrotum through one leg of his shorts to reveal a rope tied around them in an overhand knot that held up a whistle?Does that change things a bit?

Wouldn't have happened if she'd just kept her trap shut. I'll allow it.

You ever think about becoming a judge?

 

[Christo]

Without seeing the sideline incident, it's really hard to comment on who was right and who was wrong.

A parent approached a coach on the sideline during a game. What do you need to see?

Suppose the coach said, "sit down titty stick, I coach with my balls and my balls say your kid is in the net today. If you don't like my the way my balls are coaching this 10 year old girls rec soccer league, then you can suck them." Coach then slipped his scrotum through one leg of his shorts to reveal a rope tied around them in an overhand knot that held up a whistle?Does that change things a bit?

Wouldn't have happened if she'd just kept her trap shut. I'll allow it.

You ever think about becoming a judge?

Nope. They're underpaid.

 

[chet]

The coach is my brother so I expect a deluge of people siding with the parents now.

He didn't use profanity but I can see him very assertively telling her he wasn't going to pull the goalie.

In that case, you need to disclose exactly what he told the woman, and in what tone of voice. And, yeah, I guess calling her "lady" wouldn't be a profanity.

Hi GB. He was assertive and put her in her place without profanity. I don't have any other info.

Heading to the hockey game. I will check in later.

Bump for anyone who thinks he swore at the mother.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I think it's important to distinguish between the coach's policy and the incident/aftermath. Tdog and I have really just said we think that the everybody plays goalkeeper policy is not ideal. Given the policy, however, the coach seems to have handled things well.

 

[bigbottom]

I think it's important to distinguish between the coach's policy and the incident/aftermath. Tdog and I have really just said we think that the everybody plays goalkeeper policy is not ideal. Given the policy, however, the coach seems to have handled things well.

Sure, that's what you've said. Tdog has gone further, first suggesting that such a policy is what is wrong with youth sports today, and then, after conceding hyperbole, stating that the coach's actions let the girl down. I don't see how that's the case. Even the girl's own father agrees with the coach's approach. You say it's not an ideal policy. He goes further, calling it a "dumb" policy. As for how the coach handled things, I'm good with the email, but am unclear as to whether or not he was a #### in the way he responded to the mom.

 

[El Floppo]

I think it's important to distinguish between the coach's policy and the incident/aftermath. Tdog and I have really just said we think that the everybody plays goalkeeper policy is not ideal. Given the policy, however, the coach seems to have handled things well.

Sure, that's what you've said. Tdog has gone further, first suggesting that such a policy is what is wrong with youth sports today, and then, after conceding hyperbole, stating that the coach's actions let the girl down. I don't see how that's the case. Even the girl's own father agrees with the coach's approach. You say it's not an ideal policy. He goes further, calling it a "dumb" policy.As for how the coach handled things, I'm good with the email, but am unclear as to whether or not he was a #### in the way he responded to the mom.

And I guess I'm alone in thinking that it's always a good policy in this kind of situation to eat some blame and apologize to the mom for whatever it is that he did that offended her- regardless of the fact that the mom is wrong for having approached the coach mid-game.

Now that I think about it... if I thought my kid was in some kind of distress, I wouldn't give a crap about decorum and would do whatever I thought was best in the moment. Of course- in this particular case, I have enough experience with life and sports to know that my kid will be just fine for having done something they don't necessarily want to do. "Having" to play goalie for a half isn't exactly life threatening or psche-damaging

 

[chet]

This is how I think things went down:

M: You have to take her out.

C: Who are you?

M: XXXX's mom. You have to take her out. She's miserable out there.

C: I am not taking her out. She's playing goalie this half.

M: You need to take her out. I demand it.

C: I am trying to coach here. I don't have time to talk to you. She's staying in. If you want to talk to me after the game, feel free but as of now, this conversation is over.

 

[Tom Skerritt]

Did the mom have a suggestion with whom to replace XXXX? Coach should have asked her to see what her response would be.

 

[gianmarco]

In this situation, everyone handled it wrong.

Coach should have approached the girl, pulled her out and given the goalie jersey and gloves to the mother who should have promptly gotten in goal and shown how it's done. If the mom refused for some reason, then the entire family is off the team. And if mom goes in and does a good job, then your new goalie is found.

Win/win.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Mom should have encouraged and cheered on her daughter instead of approaching the coach, good life lesson could have been taught here, instead, her poor daughter has to feel uncomfortable every time she sees her coach, and I'm sure the other parents reading these emails aren't encouraged by team spirit here either..

Way to go mom..

 

[El Floppo]

Well done by chet-bro.

 

[Fennis]

Is your brother that wordy in everything he does? No way the recipient even bothered to read it.

 

[DiStefano]

I bet tdog puts all the blame on teachers in bad schools for not motivating the students better.

If you get your kicks by making 10 year old kids cry as your coaching hobby, then good for you. I was trying to point out that some kids react in an out-sized irrational manner to adverse situations like this one and perhaps the bat crazy reaction of this parent was because her kid has a real problem. I know this from years of coaching girls and having a girl or two every year that has some unexplained melt down for no apparent reason. It seems to always then result in the parent sharing some terrible psychological issue the kids has and pleading with me to find a way for that girl to have a place on the team because she is afraid to play everything else. It would be nice if the parents shared those problems beforehand but they never do. In my case, the softball gods are not going to strike us down because little Susie wouldn't put on the catching gear or Jane was too scared of line drives to play pitcher.

If you have an upset kid, it's your job as coach to figure out why, determine whether you should push because they just need some confidence and skills to handle it, or give them some allowance because they can't. I can't imagine figuring that out without talking to the parents.

If the kid is a lazy brat and the parents obnoxious, then the response is simply, "find another team."

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

Thank you for sharing.

 

[Johnny Rock]

In youth hockey there's a parents meeting before the season where this topic is addressed and the same thing is told to the kids. If someone has a problem with the coach, first the kid needs to bring it up to the coach but not the same day as a game. A cooling off period so to speak. Then if it can't be worked out the coach will have a meeting with the player and parents. All our years in hockey I never heard of a parent having to talk to a coach due to this process.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Well that was a VERY thorough response. Well done by coach.

I thought the coach defended his decision and his policy quite well, but the email was way too long and repetitive -- by the end, it was tedious -- and it wasn't all that responsive to the dad's email.

The coach didn't need to defend his decision to keep xxxxx in at goal. That wasn't at issue. He needed to defend (or apologize for) his tone in talking to the mom. He justified his tone only indirectly -- for example, by explaining why during the game wasn't the right time to have that conversation. I would have preferred a more direct statement that, under the circumstances, the coach believed his tone was appropriate and that he therefore owes no apology; or, alternatively, an admission that, in hindsight, he wishes that he hadn't raised his voice.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Well that was a VERY thorough response. Well done by coach.

I thought the coach defended his decision and his policy quite well, but the email was way too long and repetitive -- by the end, it was tedious -- and it wasn't all that responsive to the dad's email.

The coach didn't need to defend his decision to keep xxxxx in at goal. That wasn't at issue. He needed to defend (or apologize for) his tone in talking to the mom. He justified his tone only indirectly -- for example, by explaining why during the game wasn't the right time to have that conversation. I would have preferred a more direct statement that, under the circumstances, the coach believed his tone was appropriate and that he therefore owes no apology; or, alternatively, an admission that, in hindsight, he wishes that he hadn't raised his voice.

This is essentially my take as well. The husband's short email makes very clear that he has no problem with the way the coach runs the team and that his only issue is the way he spoke to the wife. I think the husband probably went too far when he said the coach should be "ashamed" but we don't know what was said. The coach spends about 90% of his response defending his coaching policy and explaining how hard it is, which is all completely beside the point and serves mostly just to prime his own ego as far as I can tell. His only response to the point raised by the husband is #5, where he says he felt "disrespected" (which strikes me as extremely lame), that he "responded in kind" and that he refuses to apologize. Coach still probably comes off the best of these three clowns, but all three seem childish, arrogant and probably a few other things I can't articulate at the moment.

 

[bigbottom]

Well that was a VERY thorough response. Well done by coach.

I thought the coach defended his decision and his policy quite well, but the email was way too long and repetitive -- by the end, it was tedious -- and it wasn't all that responsive to the dad's email.

The coach didn't need to defend his decision to keep xxxxx in at goal. That wasn't at issue. He needed to defend (or apologize for) his tone in talking to the mom. He justified his tone only indirectly -- for example, by explaining why during the game wasn't the right time to have that conversation. I would have preferred a more direct statement that, under the circumstances, the coach believed his tone was appropriate and that he therefore owes no apology; or, alternatively, an admission that, in hindsight, he wishes that he hadn't raised his voice.

This is essentially my take as well. The husband's short email makes very clear that he has no problem with the way the coach runs the team and that his only issue is the way he spoke to the wife. I think the husband probably went too far when he said the coach should be "ashamed" but we don't know what was said. The coach spends about 90% of his response defending his coaching policy and explaining how hard it is, which is all completely beside the point and serves mostly just to prime his own ego as far as I can tell. His only response to the point raised by the husband is #5, where he says he felt "disrespected" (which strikes me as extremely lame), that he "responded in kind" and that he refuses to apologize. Coach still probably comes off the best of these three clowns, but all three seem childish, arrogant and probably a few other things I can't articulate at the moment.

After reading the email again, I think the husband was being a bit passive-aggressive. I said earlier that the dad was supportive of the coach's policy, but now, I don't think that's the case at all. His short email wasn't limited to the way the guy talked to his wife. First, he talked about how soccer was SUPPOSED to be fun (all caps are his), but that it was a nightmare for his daughter. He then goes on to state that his daughter tries hard for her coach and that she deserves better. Both of those statements seem directed pretty obviously at the coach's decisions regarding his daughter, and not with how the coach spoke to his wife. Of course he states that he's not taking issue with the coach's philosophy, but then implies pretty clearly that he is doing just that.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Well that was a VERY thorough response. Well done by coach.

I thought the coach defended his decision and his policy quite well, but the email was way too long and repetitive -- by the end, it was tedious -- and it wasn't all that responsive to the dad's email.

The coach didn't need to defend his decision to keep xxxxx in at goal. That wasn't at issue. He needed to defend (or apologize for) his tone in talking to the mom. He justified his tone only indirectly -- for example, by explaining why during the game wasn't the right time to have that conversation. I would have preferred a more direct statement that, under the circumstances, the coach believed his tone was appropriate and that he therefore owes no apology; or, alternatively, an admission that, in hindsight, he wishes that he hadn't raised his voice.

This is essentially my take as well. The husband's short email makes very clear that he has no problem with the way the coach runs the team and that his only issue is the way he spoke to the wife. I think the husband probably went too far when he said the coach should be "ashamed" but we don't know what was said. The coach spends about 90% of his response defending his coaching policy and explaining how hard it is, which is all completely beside the point and serves mostly just to prime his own ego as far as I can tell. His only response to the point raised by the husband is #5, where he says he felt "disrespected" (which strikes me as extremely lame), that he "responded in kind" and that he refuses to apologize. Coach still probably comes off the best of these three clowns, but all three seem childish, arrogant and probably a few other things I can't articulate at the moment.

After reading the email again, I think the husband was being a bit passive-aggressive. I said earlier that the dad was supportive of the coach's policy, but now, I don't think that's the case at all. His short email wasn't limited to the way the guy talked to his wife. First, he talked about how soccer was SUPPOSED to be fun (all caps are his), but that it was a nightmare for his daughter. He then goes on to state that his daughter tries hard for her coach and that she deserves better. Both of those statements seem directed pretty obviously at the coach's decisions regarding his daughter, and not with how the coach spoke to his wife. Of course he states that he's not taking issue with the coach's philosophy, but then implies pretty clearly that he is doing just that.

Yeah, the husbands email was terrible. I hope it wasn't copied to the whole team as suggested earlier, which would make it even worse.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I finally read the OP. I coached and reffed youth rec soccer for years.

The coach is/was right. That's about it.

 

[chet]

I finally read the OP. I coached and reffed youth rec soccer for years.

The coach is/was right. That's about it.

Some other info that may help or shed some light on my brother and his decisions.

He played team sports at almost every level up to being on a national team and being offered a pro contract (he declined the offer). He takes his role seriously and truly wants the best for his team and players. He wants to help all of his players develop to the best of their ability. I would want him to coach any team my kids played on.

 

[DiStefano]

I finally read the OP. I coached and reffed youth rec soccer for years.

The coach is/was right. That's about it.

Some other info that may help or shed some light on my brother and his decisions.

He played team sports at almost every level up to being on a national team and being offered a pro contract (he declined the offer). He takes his role seriously and truly wants the best for his team and players. He wants to help all of his players develop to the best of their ability. I would want him to coach any team my kids played on.

Has he ascended into heaven yet?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Maybe I missed it. .. But what's so scary about playing that position? I've never seen that before. I coached boys and girls under 10 and when they were finally allowed to play goal alot of them wanted to.

 

[flranger]

Couldn't they have played with no goalie. Just take off the gloves and jersey, tell the girl she's a defender. Probably 6v6 at U10, just play 3 on the defense line and pack them in. You are not required to play with a goalie, you just have the option to select one if you wish.

Hell, just have all six girls set up a wall and let the other team keep blasting balls into it. That would have been great fun to witness.

Coach won this thing in a landslide.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Maybe I missed it. .. But what's so scary about playing that position? I've never seen that before. I coached boys and girls under 10 and when they were finally allowed to play goal alot of them wanted to.

Some of my girls are scared they'll get hurt, but more often I think it's about being the center of attention. Every time you screw up, everyone knows it. It's a lot less obvious if you're playing a field position.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Teach children to overcome their fears, especially when what they are afraid of is completely harmless... The coach did the right thing by keeping her in goal.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I actually kind of liked how long it was. I kept waiting for him to slip up and be very rude. I picture the husband reading it thinking that at any moment there was going to be some nasty comment that he can hang his hat on. Then sitting there thinking, my wife sucks for making me write this email.

 

[dutch]

I actually kind of liked how long it was. I kept waiting for him to slip up and be very rude. I picture the husband reading it thinking that at any moment there was going to be some nasty comment that he can hang his hat on. Then sitting there thinking, my wife sucks for making me write this email.

^This. Husband was getting the "you better back on this or I'll make your life a miserable hell for along time, pal!" vibe from wifey and now that he "volunteered" to be the pass-thorugh for her the coach decided to do likewise.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Reason #4080 why women's sports suck.

 

[spOOfy]

coach

 

[tdog]

And no I don't blame teachers, I blame the countless types of know-it-all parents that either throw public fits demanding action or writing lengthy emails defending why they are always right.

Public fits like, say, during the middle of a soccer game?

Yes just like that. Both parties let the kid down. Sorry I did not say that in easier terms for you.

How did the coach let the kid down? Be sure to show your work (because each point you raised previously was easily refuted).Note: even the dad doesn't think the coach let his kid down.

You are trying to win an argument about why the policies and procedures leading up to a ten year old kid being "visibly upset" and having a "nightmare" experience in goal were entirely equitable and mandated by the regulations in place. Moreover, you note the parents did not avail themselves of the available notice and comment period and then took the law into their own hands by protesting the results outside the bounds of the various norms associated with the parent / coach transaction. Great. You win. Case closed. The kid crying in the goal is affirmed. You can add whatever facts make you feel better about this result--the kid needed it, wasn't that upset, doesn't have social anxiety problem, the helicopter parents are over-protective, the father wants his girls crying, etc.

How about this, it sounds like the coach knows a lot about the sport and skills associated with it as well as having a understanding of what it take to build teamwork and confidence. I humbly suggest that he spend a few hours with high school and college coaches of women and girls and discuss the best way to handle young girls reluctant to face failure in a spotlight position. I think he will hear about how the female athletes they coach are often perfectionists, are incredibly hard on themselves, would walk through fire for their teammates and coaches, will play hurt beyond any male athlete, and that the manner in which you instill confidence and purpose in young women is far different than his experience as a male athlete and the coaches to whom he responded well. At least that was my experience coaching high school girls when I was teacher and continues to be what I hear when I go to clinics taught by such coaches, including the one I went to yesterday.

I do not think such conversations will alter the basic way he coaches but it will change, on the margins, the way he approaches his team and he will get those girls to do just about anything for the team with much greater ease than he could with boys. I think they may have suggestions concerning how he may be able to tweak his goalie policy and his coaching of the position in such a way that he could get the vast majority of his girls, even if reluctantly, to try the position. I think he would also be able to better understand how far to push his girls in order to inspire the type remarkable strength girls display in sports without crushing them and having them give up on the sport. He could also bring in a high school player who can get the girls to do just about anything. I wouldn't be surprised, if he is the type of competitor described, that he isn't already thinking about these things because he likely really wants his girls to be very good at the sport.