Soccer snacks- stupid vent edition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If siblings are helping themselves first that’s on the parents. Come on. Of course if there are leftovers anyone who’s there should be allowed to have some - not every kid brings a sibling. Let’s be real. but it’s not that big of a deal to give five extra bags of goldfish or whatever. They should not go first.

How do you know it’s not a big deal? Food insecurity is a real thing, even in th suburbs. Those extra 5 bags of goldfish would be their own child’s snack for a week of school lunches. Those 5 goldfish might be a snack for their own child after other activities.

I real.h don’t understand the current “siblings are one human” mentality, where siblings must somehow always exist as one being - going to the same birthday parties, no matter how age inappropriate, and now sharing snacks meant for the children engaging in a specific activity.

It is on the parents. Is it really that hard to tell your other child that the snacks are for the players only, and to hand them a snack that you have brought for exactly that reason? Or to tell your child they don’t need a snack, considering all they’ve done is sit and watch?

This board is so hilarious.. leave a baby to CIO at a few months old, and argue about “being a parent”, but throwing a fit about unhelpful other par nets if 8 year old Larla doesn’t get a bag of goldfish at their sisters soccer game.

Amen! I love this post so much!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s ridiculous to provide snacks after games, but for every team my kids have been on where there was a snack rotation, everyone brought enough for siblings. Seems reasonable to me given that no one needs the snacks—they are just for fun, so why not include all the kids.

Snacks are for the team. Parent bring snacks for the siblings. What’s so hard about that?

It’s confusing because parents should also be the ones bringing/sending snacks for their own player in the tiny minority of cases where a post-game snack is actually needed, like where the kid is diabetic, hypoglycemic, has a super-charged metabolism, etc. If you think a snack rotation is important because it helps the team bond or just is a fun thing, why not also include the young spectators who are helping to support the team?

While I think the snack situation is stupid, I don’t understand why that’s team building for siblings. I can understand that after a long game kids are hungry and why not have orange slices and Gatorade. Little kid sitting on the sidelines Don’t need to be raidinf the team snacks. It’s a food grab! And if the little kids need something to eat then the parents should be planning and bringing their own food.

But almost no kids of team snack age are actually hungry after a 40 or 45 minute game, unless their parents failed to feed them properly beforehand. They might be thirsty, but hopefully all have water bottles. The “fun”rationale is the only one that makes a lick of sense to me, and I think it’s kind of stingy to not let the little kids who got dragged to their siblings game participate in the fun.

[Anonymous]

How many siblings are showing up?

[Anonymous]

Hate that sliced oranges are a common snack. Every kid grabs the slices with their dirty hands. Of course they're dirty! But god forbid a parent bring something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many siblings are showing up?

There were at least 15 siblings hanging around the last time I brought snacks. It was my turn late in the season and I knew all the kids by then, so I passive aggressively labeled the snacks for the team using leftover goody bags from past birthday parties. I was over it, there were more siblings than team members at almost every game. Several times last season there weren’t enough snacks for the players. We’re not doing team snacks this season and I’m so happy.

[Anonymous]

I’m generous, but I’m not bringing 15 extra snack bags! That is ridiculous - they need to do what I do and tell their non-players they don’t get snacks this time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If siblings are helping themselves first that’s on the parents. Come on. Of course if there are leftovers anyone who’s there should be allowed to have some - not every kid brings a sibling. Let’s be real. but it’s not that big of a deal to give five extra bags of goldfish or whatever. They should not go first.

How do you know it’s not a big deal? Food insecurity is a real thing, even in th suburbs. Those extra 5 bags of goldfish would be their own child’s snack for a week of school lunches. Those 5 goldfish might be a snack for their own child after other activities.

I real.h don’t understand the current “siblings are one human” mentality, where siblings must somehow always exist as one being - going to the same birthday parties, no matter how age inappropriate, and now sharing snacks meant for the children engaging in a specific activity.

It is on the parents. Is it really that hard to tell your other child that the snacks are for the players only, and to hand them a snack that you have brought for exactly that reason? Or to tell your child they don’t need a snack, considering all they’ve done is sit and watch?

This board is so hilarious.. leave a baby to CIO at a few months old, and argue about “being a parent”, but throwing a fit about unhelpful other par nets if 8 year old Larla doesn’t get a bag of goldfish at their sisters soccer game.

It's not that hard, but I'm not telling my friend's 2 year old they can't have goldfish that are in front of their face. YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If siblings are helping themselves first that’s on the parents. Come on. Of course if there are leftovers anyone who’s there should be allowed to have some - not every kid brings a sibling. Let’s be real. but it’s not that big of a deal to give five extra bags of goldfish or whatever. They should not go first.

How do you know it’s not a big deal? Food insecurity is a real thing, even in th suburbs. Those extra 5 bags of goldfish would be their own child’s snack for a week of school lunches. Those 5 goldfish might be a snack for their own child after other activities.

I real.h don’t understand the current “siblings are one human” mentality, where siblings must somehow always exist as one being - going to the same birthday parties, no matter how age inappropriate, and now sharing snacks meant for the children engaging in a specific activity.

It is on the parents. Is it really that hard to tell your other child that the snacks are for the players only, and to hand them a snack that you have brought for exactly that reason? Or to tell your child they don’t need a snack, considering all they’ve done is sit and watch?

This board is so hilarious.. leave a baby to CIO at a few months old, and argue about “being a parent”, but throwing a fit about unhelpful other par nets if 8 year old Larla doesn’t get a bag of goldfish at their sisters soccer game.

It's not that hard, but I'm not telling my friend's 2 year old they can't have goldfish that are in front of their face. YMMV.

Your friend should be the one telling her to-year-old that she can’t go have team snacks. Yes, 2 year olds understand.

[Anonymous]

"You will have to ask your brother or sister if you can have some of theirs."

[Anonymous]

Op just say "these snacks are for the players."

Mean? Not really. Clueless parents need to clue in.

Or have the coach send out an email reminding everyone.

It's so nice when they outgrow the snack stage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many siblings are showing up?

There were at least 15 siblings hanging around the last time I brought snacks. It was my turn late in the season and I knew all the kids by then, so I passive aggressively labeled the snacks for the team using leftover goody bags from past birthday parties. I was over it, there were more siblings than team members at almost every game. Several times last season there weren’t enough snacks for the players. We’re not doing team snacks this season and I’m so happy.

This sounds like a scene from a movie about crazy parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If siblings are helping themselves first that’s on the parents. Come on. Of course if there are leftovers anyone who’s there should be allowed to have some - not every kid brings a sibling. Let’s be real. but it’s not that big of a deal to give five extra bags of goldfish or whatever. They should not go first.

How do you know it’s not a big deal? Food insecurity is a real thing, even in th suburbs. Those extra 5 bags of goldfish would be their own child’s snack for a week of school lunches. Those 5 goldfish might be a snack for their own child after other activities.

I real.h don’t understand the current “siblings are one human” mentality, where siblings must somehow always exist as one being - going to the same birthday parties, no matter how age inappropriate, and now sharing snacks meant for the children engaging in a specific activity.

It is on the parents. Is it really that hard to tell your other child that the snacks are for the players only, and to hand them a snack that you have brought for exactly that reason? Or to tell your child they don’t need a snack, considering all they’ve done is sit and watch?

This board is so hilarious.. leave a baby to CIO at a few months old, and argue about “being a parent”, but throwing a fit about unhelpful other par nets if 8 year old Larla doesn’t get a bag of goldfish at their sisters soccer game.

It's not that hard, but I'm not telling my friend's 2 year old they can't have goldfish that are in front of their face. YMMV.

Your friend should be the one telling her to-year-old that she can’t go have team snacks. Yes, 2 year olds understand.

Sometimes the kid just toddles over while the parents are packing up. WHO FREAKING CARES. Some of you are insufferable. If there's extra, they can have it. If not, they can't. I'm not hovering over a juice box like some crazy Nazi rationalist to prove a point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many siblings are showing up?

There were at least 15 siblings hanging around the last time I brought snacks. It was my turn late in the season and I knew all the kids by then, so I passive aggressively labeled the snacks for the team using leftover goody bags from past birthday parties. I was over it, there were more siblings than team members at almost every game. Several times last season there weren’t enough snacks for the players. We’re not doing team snacks this season and I’m so happy.

This sounds like a scene from a movie about crazy parents.

It really does. Get a life, PP.

[Anonymous]

We buy two boxes of goldfish packs and bring them. We tell kids who didn’t play that they have to wait until the team players have taken a snack. If there is something left over, we will give them to siblings who ask politely. We aer a baseball family. There are 12 kids n the team, most games have 10 players there. We end up with 16 Goldfish packets so we pass out the extra 6 if there are 6 siblings. If we bring some home, great. If we don’t, that is fine as well.

But that is us.

We do make siblings wait. Most of the parents on our team do the same thing and it has not been a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I think soccer snacks are stupid in the first place, but I agree with you on this.

I think soccer is stupid.