Guest player playing more than players on roster

[Anonymous]

This happened to my DD at U9. Coaches brought in 2 players from outside of our club. Roster was over the limit for the tournament. 2 guest players played the entire final. End of fall season tournament. My daughter asked me how "her team" would have done without the guest players. We quit the team after that.

[Anonymous]

Sometimes the coaches may think they are doing the team a favor by helping them win… but most kids just want to play and earn the result themselves.

[Anonymous]

Ugh I hate that.

The only time it might make some sense is if the guest plays a specialized position and is subbing specifically for an absent kid that plays that position (catcher, goalie or whatever). But usually there will be a backup player for that, especially at younger ages.

But unfortunately, common.

[Anonymous]

What's worse is on our current soccer team (U11) there are boys who didn't make next years team. They are still on the roster and we have a memorial day weekend tournament. Coach announced 4 guest players, who are all new players who I think will be on next years team. Meanwhile the boys who didn't make next years team will show up to the tournament but likely sit and watch their replacements play. And their parents paid for this! Its a really messed up way to operate youth sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over the weekend our team didn't have any subs for a tournament so the coach brought in a girl from a higher team to fill in (which is allowed.) He then started that girl and had her play the entire tournament, while he sat girls from his own team -- the same three were subbed over the course of each game. That really bugged me. We pay for this team, our girls are the ones who got us to the event. And we lost anyway -- it was always a given we weren't going to win.

Am I wrong to have a bad feeling about this? Of course she should have played-- f she was subbed an equal amount I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But this way felt wrong to me.

If you are referring to the Striker v. GFR game then you are wrong. The only higher player to start was the goalie, because GFR did not have a goalie available. The other higher girl did NOT start.

OP here. Not that game.
And to answer a previous question, we had just enough players. Coach brought in an extra to have one sub.

So there were 90 min on bench time to be spread between 11 field players? Did you also say 3 players split the 90 bench minutes so 8, including the sub, didn’t sit? Doesn’t sound that egregious to me. Better than having to risk playing a player down with an injury or if a players fitness couldn’t handle the whole tournament

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's worse is on our current soccer team (U11) there are boys who didn't make next years team. They are still on the roster and we have a memorial day weekend tournament. Coach announced 4 guest players, who are all new players who I think will be on next years team. Meanwhile the boys who didn't make next years team will show up to the tournament but likely sit and watch their replacements play. And their parents paid for this! Its a really messed up way to operate youth sports.

Ugh! That is disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over the weekend our team didn't have any subs for a tournament so the coach brought in a girl from a higher team to fill in (which is allowed.) He then started that girl and had her play the entire tournament, while he sat girls from his own team -- the same three were subbed over the course of each game. That really bugged me. We pay for this team, our girls are the ones who got us to the event. And we lost anyway -- it was always a given we weren't going to win.

Am I wrong to have a bad feeling about this? Of course she should have played-- f she was subbed an equal amount I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But this way felt wrong to me.

If you are referring to the Striker v. GFR game then you are wrong. The only higher player to start was the goalie, because GFR did not have a goalie available. The other higher girl did NOT start.

OP here. Not that game.
And to answer a previous question, we had just enough players. Coach brought in an extra to have one sub.

So there were 90 min on bench time to be spread between 11 field players? Did you also say 3 players split the 90 bench minutes so 8, including the sub, didn’t sit? Doesn’t sound that egregious to me. Better than having to risk playing a player down with an injury or if a players fitness couldn’t handle the whole tournament

Would it be egregious to you if your kid was the one sitting while the guest player played the whole game?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over the weekend our team didn't have any subs for a tournament so the coach brought in a girl from a higher team to fill in (which is allowed.) He then started that girl and had her play the entire tournament, while he sat girls from his own team -- the same three were subbed over the course of each game. That really bugged me. We pay for this team, our girls are the ones who got us to the event. And we lost anyway -- it was always a given we weren't going to win.

Am I wrong to have a bad feeling about this? Of course she should have played-- f she was subbed an equal amount I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But this way felt wrong to me.

If you are referring to the Striker v. GFR game then you are wrong. The only higher player to start was the goalie, because GFR did not have a goalie available. The other higher girl did NOT start.

OP here. Not that game.
And to answer a previous question, we had just enough players. Coach brought in an extra to have one sub.

So there were 90 min on bench time to be spread between 11 field players? Did you also say 3 players split the 90 bench minutes so 8, including the sub, didn’t sit? Doesn’t sound that egregious to me. Better than having to risk playing a player down with an injury or if a players fitness couldn’t handle the whole tournament

Would it be egregious to you if your kid was the one sitting while the guest player played the whole game?

To me, this whole thread doesn’t match how OP framed the subject. It’s one sub when they had zero. It’s a no brainer to add one. Others pointed out the sub is from a higher level and the coach likely (justifiably) offered playing time as an incentive (possibly not explicitly but it’s understood). It’s not a lot of bench minutes. If you’re upset, why no anger at the coach for not sitting more than three of the regulars or at the others on the roster who weren’t there. The sub should be welcomed for pitching in. If you already had 13 or 14 regulars I’d feel differently, but you had a skeleton squad and needed help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's worse is on our current soccer team (U11) there are boys who didn't make next years team. They are still on the roster and we have a memorial day weekend tournament. Coach announced 4 guest players, who are all new players who I think will be on next years team. Meanwhile the boys who didn't make next years team will show up to the tournament but likely sit and watch their replacements play. And their parents paid for this! Its a really messed up way to operate youth sports.

Oh my…this one is truly shameful. What on earth is wrong with these coaches?! Horrid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over the weekend our team didn't have any subs for a tournament so the coach brought in a girl from a higher team to fill in (which is allowed.) He then started that girl and had her play the entire tournament, while he sat girls from his own team -- the same three were subbed over the course of each game. That really bugged me. We pay for this team, our girls are the ones who got us to the event. And we lost anyway -- it was always a given we weren't going to win.

Am I wrong to have a bad feeling about this? Of course she should have played-- f she was subbed an equal amount I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But this way felt wrong to me.

If you are referring to the Striker v. GFR game then you are wrong. The only higher player to start was the goalie, because GFR did not have a goalie available. The other higher girl did NOT start.

OP here. Not that game.
And to answer a previous question, we had just enough players. Coach brought in an extra to have one sub.

So there were 90 min on bench time to be spread between 11 field players? Did you also say 3 players split the 90 bench minutes so 8, including the sub, didn’t sit? Doesn’t sound that egregious to me. Better than having to risk playing a player down with an injury or if a players fitness couldn’t handle the whole tournament

+1 this doesn’t sound too bad depending on how the bench time was handled. Having one extra player was obviously necessary, and the guest player was doing the team a favor (and being from a higher level team, was likely the best player in attendance). If the bench time was split between 3 girls, it isn’t too bad- though obviously it would be better to split the bench time up even further. Also depends a little on the age of the kids.

[Anonymous]

My son guest played in a baseball tournament once and I thought the coach did it the right way. He was brought in to pitch and did not start. He came in as relief and didn't position play during the game. He did his job in one game and went home.

In that case, they had no pitchers and a too small roster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's worse is on our current soccer team (U11) there are boys who didn't make next years team. They are still on the roster and we have a memorial day weekend tournament. Coach announced 4 guest players, who are all new players who I think will be on next years team. Meanwhile the boys who didn't make next years team will show up to the tournament but likely sit and watch their replacements play. And their parents paid for this! Its a really messed up way to operate youth sports.

That is a horrible way to treat the kids and parents who have worked hard and paid money all season.

It should serve as a warning to all the players staying on the team as to how your the organization views all the players - a cog in the wheel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over the weekend our team didn't have any subs for a tournament so the coach brought in a girl from a higher team to fill in (which is allowed.) He then started that girl and had her play the entire tournament, while he sat girls from his own team -- the same three were subbed over the course of each game. That really bugged me. We pay for this team, our girls are the ones who got us to the event. And we lost anyway -- it was always a given we weren't going to win.

Am I wrong to have a bad feeling about this? Of course she should have played-- f she was subbed an equal amount I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But this way felt wrong to me.

If you are referring to the Striker v. GFR game then you are wrong. The only higher player to start was the goalie, because GFR did not have a goalie available. The other higher girl did NOT start.

OP here. Not that game.
And to answer a previous question, we had just enough players. Coach brought in an extra to have one sub.

So there were 90 min on bench time to be spread between 11 field players? Did you also say 3 players split the 90 bench minutes so 8, including the sub, didn’t sit? Doesn’t sound that egregious to me. Better than having to risk playing a player down with an injury or if a players fitness couldn’t handle the whole tournament

It would seem egregious to me if my kid was one of the ones sitting for 1/3 or more of each game while 8 didn’t sit at all. Especially when the team isn’t winning anyway.

[Anonymous]

Youth sports has become transactional on many levels. This is just an example. No team spirit; every person for themselves, incl the coaches.

But it builds character, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Youth sports has become transactional on many levels. This is just an example. No team spirit; every person for themselves, incl the coaches.

But it builds character, right?

So accurate! Im sick of it.