Anonymous wrote:Common but yes annoying. It's one of the many things I dislike about club sports. Especially at young ages it's a hard thing to explain to the kids on the team.
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.
Anonymous wrote:I guess the thinking of the coach could be that the better player would refuse to help if she knew she would not get as much playing time as possible.
Anonymous wrote:I guess the thinking of the coach could be that the better player would refuse to help if she knew she would not get as much playing time as possible.
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.
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.