Little League Residency Requirements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

Not always. We have little league baseball and softball, but they’re run by different programs and boards. There were two little league baseball leagues in town, but they’ve now merged so there’s 1 ll baseball and 1 ll softball. They both run programs from T-ball to Juniors. Each have issues, but none that this PP describes. It’s more lack of field space and sketchy politics in all-star picks (which seems to be the norm everywhere).

For registration the residency requirement is pretty lax on the softball side until you hit all-stars. Then they require all the paperwork and have it checked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those little leagues that have not tried softball should. Softball rec leagues comprising of an entire county are not true community program leagues. Little League softball is and should be the way to go.

Which softball rec leagues comprise an entire county? Some have larger footprints than other but the whole point of rec league is that they kids are playing in their own neighborhood. Little League programs focus on baseball, which is fine, but the girls never get a fair deal.

Arlington Girls Softball Association for one.

That's a big country sponsored organization in a fairly small county, not the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

This is a helpful perspective. I hope Arlington Girls Softball Association leaders are reading some of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the local rec softball leagues only has one board member. This league is definitely not conducting background checks on coaches either. People still ignorantly allow their girls to play in this league not recognizing the severity of this oversight

Which league? All the leagues I know of have the background checks. (Not that background checks make that much difference, seems like every week I read about a teacher getting arrested after having a history of prior offenses.)

Not PP and I know exactly which league PP is talking about. There was a very unamicable split between that independent league and one of the new little leagues that is sending 3 teams to all-stars this year. NB that I don't represent or have kids who play for (or ever played for) either of these leagues.

I wouldn't judge the entire Fairfax County interleague group by that league, at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

This is a helpful perspective. I hope Arlington Girls Softball Association leaders are reading some of this.

That post has nothing to do with AGSA, which is softball only and has multiple girls teams at all ages. Did you quote the wrong post?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think those little leagues that have not tried softball should. Softball rec leagues comprising of an entire county are not true community program leagues. Little League softball is and should be the way to go.

Jealousy of a league that legitimately draws players from an entire county (and beyond) is not a good look, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those little leagues that have not tried softball should. Softball rec leagues comprising of an entire county are not true community program leagues. Little League softball is and should be the way to go.

Which softball rec leagues comprise an entire county? Some have larger footprints than other but the whole point of rec league is that they kids are playing in their own neighborhood. Little League programs focus on baseball, which is fine, but the girls never get a fair deal.

I'm in Charlotte and we simply don't have enough girls playing softball in any of the rec leagues in the county. There's a separate county-wide softball league for girls as a result. Many of the youth sports associations here that sponsor Little League (or Cal Ripken) will also sponsor softball through this local league. Believe me, softball parents would love it if their was enough interest to do truly rec softball and not have to travel around the county. Unfortunately, there's not, and this is how we make softball available to our girls. And it least with this model, the girls are on teams with other girls from their local community. It's not like Suzie is playing on a team 30 minutes across the county with girls she doesn't know. She plays with the girls who live near her, many of whom she probably goes to school with, or they go to another nearby school. It still supports that community feeling.

I've heard similar stories from around the country. There's just not enough girls playing softball to have true rec programs like those that exist in baseball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those little leagues that have not tried softball should. Softball rec leagues comprising of an entire county are not true community program leagues. Little League softball is and should be the way to go.

Which softball rec leagues comprise an entire county? Some have larger footprints than other but the whole point of rec league is that they kids are playing in their own neighborhood. Little League programs focus on baseball, which is fine, but the girls never get a fair deal.

I'm in Charlotte and we simply don't have enough girls playing softball in any of the rec leagues in the county. There's a separate county-wide softball league for girls as a result. Many of the youth sports associations here that sponsor Little League (or Cal Ripken) will also sponsor softball through this local league. Believe me, softball parents would love it if their was enough interest to do truly rec softball and not have to travel around the county. Unfortunately, there's not, and this is how we make softball available to our girls. And it least with this model, the girls are on teams with other girls from their local community. It's not like Suzie is playing on a team 30 minutes across the county with girls she doesn't know. She plays with the girls who live near her, many of whom she probably goes to school with, or they go to another nearby school. It still supports that community feeling.

I've heard similar stories from around the country. There's just not enough girls playing softball to have true rec programs like those that exist in baseball.

By my count there are 7 softball little leagues in Fairfax County (SCLL, CSLL, SYA, GFLL, MLL, WLL, and FLL) and 7 independent leagues (BRYC, NVGSA, VGSL, CYA, FHYAA, SYC, and HRYS though they play Loudoun leagues). That doesn't include Arlington (AGSA), Alexandria (ALL), Loudoun (LSLL, LGSL, WLGSL, LLGSL, AGSL) or Prince William counties (PWGFS, PWCSLL) who might play with or against these leagues. If anything we have too many opportunities for the number of girls who might possibly play softball in northern Virginia, making each league smaller and necessitating interleauge play rather than allowing for a few bigger leagues that can build in more parity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

This is a helpful perspective. I hope Arlington Girls Softball Association leaders are reading some of this.

That post has nothing to do with AGSA, which is softball only and has multiple girls teams at all ages. Did you quote the wrong post?

Little League is making a push for AGSA to merge with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

This is a helpful perspective. I hope Arlington Girls Softball Association leaders are reading some of this.

That post has nothing to do with AGSA, which is softball only and has multiple girls teams at all ages. Did you quote the wrong post?

Little League is making a push for AGSA to merge with them.

That would be a big shift.

Our friends on an independent league that became an LL are not a fan, for all the reasons PP mentioned. They talk regularly about how softball gets no love in their league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those little leagues that have not tried softball should. Softball rec leagues comprising of an entire county are not true community program leagues. Little League softball is and should be the way to go.

Which softball rec leagues comprise an entire county? Some have larger footprints than other but the whole point of rec league is that they kids are playing in their own neighborhood. Little League programs focus on baseball, which is fine, but the girls never get a fair deal.

I'm in Charlotte and we simply don't have enough girls playing softball in any of the rec leagues in the county. There's a separate county-wide softball league for girls as a result. Many of the youth sports associations here that sponsor Little League (or Cal Ripken) will also sponsor softball through this local league. Believe me, softball parents would love it if their was enough interest to do truly rec softball and not have to travel around the county. Unfortunately, there's not, and this is how we make softball available to our girls. And it least with this model, the girls are on teams with other girls from their local community. It's not like Suzie is playing on a team 30 minutes across the county with girls she doesn't know. She plays with the girls who live near her, many of whom she probably goes to school with, or they go to another nearby school. It still supports that community feeling.

I've heard similar stories from around the country. There's just not enough girls playing softball to have true rec programs like those that exist in baseball.

By my count there are 7 softball little leagues in Fairfax County (SCLL, CSLL, SYA, GFLL, MLL, WLL, and FLL) and 7 independent leagues (BRYC, NVGSA, VGSL, CYA, FHYAA, SYC, and HRYS though they play Loudoun leagues). That doesn't include Arlington (AGSA), Alexandria (ALL), Loudoun (LSLL, LGSL, WLGSL, LLGSL, AGSL) or Prince William counties (PWGFS, PWCSLL) who might play with or against these leagues. If anything we have too many opportunities for the number of girls who might possibly play softball in northern Virginia, making each league smaller and necessitating interleauge play rather than allowing for a few bigger leagues that can build in more parity.

That does seem like too much for one county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those little leagues that have not tried softball should. Softball rec leagues comprising of an entire county are not true community program leagues. Little League softball is and should be the way to go.

Which softball rec leagues comprise an entire county? Some have larger footprints than other but the whole point of rec league is that they kids are playing in their own neighborhood. Little League programs focus on baseball, which is fine, but the girls never get a fair deal.

I'm in Charlotte and we simply don't have enough girls playing softball in any of the rec leagues in the county. There's a separate county-wide softball league for girls as a result. Many of the youth sports associations here that sponsor Little League (or Cal Ripken) will also sponsor softball through this local league. Believe me, softball parents would love it if their was enough interest to do truly rec softball and not have to travel around the county. Unfortunately, there's not, and this is how we make softball available to our girls. And it least with this model, the girls are on teams with other girls from their local community. It's not like Suzie is playing on a team 30 minutes across the county with girls she doesn't know. She plays with the girls who live near her, many of whom she probably goes to school with, or they go to another nearby school. It still supports that community feeling.

I've heard similar stories from around the country. There's just not enough girls playing softball to have true rec programs like those that exist in baseball.

By my count there are 7 softball little leagues in Fairfax County (SCLL, CSLL, SYA, GFLL, MLL, WLL, and FLL) and 7 independent leagues (BRYC, NVGSA, VGSL, CYA, FHYAA, SYC, and HRYS though they play Loudoun leagues). That doesn't include Arlington (AGSA), Alexandria (ALL), Loudoun (LSLL, LGSL, WLGSL, LLGSL, AGSL) or Prince William counties (PWGFS, PWCSLL) who might play with or against these leagues. If anything we have too many opportunities for the number of girls who might possibly play softball in northern Virginia, making each league smaller and necessitating interleauge play rather than allowing for a few bigger leagues that can build in more parity.

That does seem like too much for one county.

It's a big county, but I even forgot one LL (SYA).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

This is a helpful perspective. I hope Arlington Girls Softball Association leaders are reading some of this.

That post has nothing to do with AGSA, which is softball only and has multiple girls teams at all ages. Did you quote the wrong post?

Little League is making a push for AGSA to merge with them.

Looks like Arlington already has softball, or did this merger with AGSA already happen and now they have an LL charter? Arlington's on the LL tournament schedule.
https://www.vad4ll.net/Default.aspx?tabid=2773091

AGSA is playing in the interleague tournament with the Fairfax leagues also this summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our league is in a trial period for joining little league for softball and I really hope they ditch it after this year. It is a headache for everyone. Seems wonderful and organized for baseball but not worth it for softball.

100%! Little League is a horrible option for girls and if any other rec programs exist, should not be considered. The boys outnumber the girls by such a large amount, there's no way to keep resources equal and girls will always take a backseat. Girls will always receive less attention and they're given the leftover equipment The uniforms (for older groups) are rarely female fit, but instead unisex. The age groups are too broad, it hinders development. In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys and it's such a disservice! Our 6U teams bat from a tee the first couple of weeks, and quickly move to coach pitch. Girls are so much more attentive than boys, they learn more and have much more fun without the distraction and should not be held back because "we need to form a complete team and don't have enough girls".

I've been in the fastpitch world for over 30 years, having daughters play LL, fastpitch only rec leagues, travel ball and college. We now run our own rec program and the difference between our faspitch only league and LL is night and day. I understand the convenience of LL if DD is practicing or playing at the same time/park as DS, but that's the only plus and rarely is the case.

Sorry for the rant, I know I didn't answer OPs question.

There's boys or co-ed rec softball? Where?
OP, how many years did your daughters play baseball?

I think he means that the Little League organization they were in had baseball and tried adding softball but the softball teams were treated like second class citizens. Not surprising at all.

I was following that from the resources perspective but then he said "In the youngest ages, girls always are merged with boys". That insinuates his LL was doing co-ed softball.

Sorry, to clarify, I meant in the youngest ages of LL, there isn't usually a real softball program. Instead, the league will merge girls onto boys' baseball teams. My oldest only played softball, because she was about 10 when she started and at that point LL offered softball. But our youngest played 2 years of LL baseball before we made the move to a girls softball only rec league. Had we stayed with LL, she likely would have played another years of baseball. Our girls played youth softball in 3 different states (military family), with rec ball in 2. When we retired, we moved back to one of those states to continue growing the rec league in another part of town. We have so many girls come to our league letting us know LL is still placing the boys and girls together in minor baseball or that they never got a chance to play as many games as the boys did. Also, LL, with their wide age range teams aren't keeping girls playing. We involve them in umpiring and give them more attention to keep them active in sports past 11 - the age when girls, unless competitive, stop playing sports. LL cannot retain them because the serious girls move on to travel, and the others, being treated as an afterthought, become disinterested.

This is a helpful perspective. I hope Arlington Girls Softball Association leaders are reading some of this.

That post has nothing to do with AGSA, which is softball only and has multiple girls teams at all ages. Did you quote the wrong post?

Little League is making a push for AGSA to merge with them.

Looks like Arlington already has softball, or did this merger with AGSA already happen and now they have an LL charter? Arlington's on the LL tournament schedule.
https://www.vad4ll.net/Default.aspx?tabid=2773091

AGSA is playing in the interleague tournament with the Fairfax leagues also this summer.

AGSA was trying it this year but it looks like McLean knocked all of the AGSA teams out in the first round. Egos are surely bruised.