Anonymous wrote:

But it sounds like you're saying that increased playing time wouldn't be the solution to being less fit. I agree with that. I just don't think that's the issue. I don't think that the issue is his field playing at all. I think this is being driven mostly by the fact that he's better than the other GK

Got it. I would just talk to the coach. But I am not sure that being a field player for significant time at U13 is necessary to developing as a goalie. Both my son's team and my daughter's team (she is U16 now) had dedicated goalies at that age, who did not play in the field for more than very short times per game. I would ask around more about that. Unless the issue is that your son just wants to play in the field, in which case he should get to, if that was what you were promised.

I don't know about general recommendations. I do know what my kid's GK trainer wants for my particular kid, and specifically looked for a team that said they could provide it. My kid is playing up a year, and didn't play on a team during the pandemic, but did a lot of backyard type training. So, it might be that his GK trainer feels that it's appropriate for him to still get an experience, even if other U13 kids no longer need, since they've got 2 more years experience than he does. Or maybe he suggests if for all U13's. I just don't know. I do feel that since we talked about this very specifically when the club moved him up, they should do what they agreed to.

Part of the problem is that I think if I insist, and the team loses because the other team scores more in the half he's not in the goal, my kid's going to get a lot of pressure from teammates to stay in the goal. I'm not sure how to handle that.

But it sounds like you're saying that increased playing time wouldn't be the solution to being less fit. I agree with that. I just don't think that's the issue. I don't think that the issue is his field playing at all. I think this is being driven mostly by the fact that he's better than the other GK

Got it. I would just talk to the coach. But I am not sure that being a field player for significant time at U13 is necessary to developing as a goalie. Both my son's team and my daughter's team (she is U16 now) had dedicated goalies at that age, who did not play in the field for more than very short times per game. I would ask around more about that. Unless the issue is that your son just wants to play in the field, in which case he should get to, if that was what you were promised.

Agree with a lot of previous. As long as he gets ample field time in practice, playing field in games is not that critical. He could also consider joining a rec league or men’s league on the side and playing field (don’t tell them he plays keeper - teams are always looking for a good keeper).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things, first -- practice time working on field skills is more important than game time on the field. As long as your GK is regularly practicing with their teammates and working on foot skills, passing, etc. during practice (and outside of practice), they should continue to develop. Passing drills and small-sided games are great places for your kid to get "field" touches outside of games.

Second, the reason why GK coaches recommend field playing time at younger ages is because young teams don't play through the keeper like older teams do. If your kid's team plays out from the back and through the keeper (like they should be doing at u13) your keeper should be getting a lot of "foot" touches during the games. If they don't -- that could be a sign to look for another club/team.

Of course, getting field playing time when your keeper is not in goal is ideal, but it sometimes isn't feasible as the keepers get older. While the adage that the keeper should "at least be able to make the team as a field player" is true, "make the tam" and "play regularly" are very different things as things get more competitive.

Finally, I'm not sure I fully agree with the GK coach's reasoning on field playing time. I've always been told play in the field to develop footskills. Playing in the goal in game and game-like situations allows the keeper to best develop their sense of how plays develop and where dangerous shots and crosses come from, with the added advantage that they see it from the right perspective and get to learn from their successes or failures in reacting to that situation. While seeing the play develop from the other perspective (ie as the attacker) could be helpful, I don't think its an experience keepers necessarily need on a regular basis.

I agree with all of this. Also, if this is a travel team (which I assume it is since we’re even having this discussion), some clubs are really strict about kids who try out as GKs playing as GKs rather than splitting once they reach U13. If they aren’t, they end up with kids who have decent GK skills trying out as GKs when their real goal is to be a field player and they use GK as a way to back door onto a team they wouldn’t otherwise make. Holding a hard line on GKs playing as GKs reduces the gamesmanship.

Which would be fine, if they'd said that to me when they approached me about moving him up to this team. We would have turned them down, and there would be no hard feelings. But we didn't engage in any gamemanship here.

What is his goal here, to be a GK or a field player? Or does he not know yet? PP is correct that practice time on field skills is more important than fame time in the field for a GK. Yes, GL need to understand how the play is developing and why, but how they engage with a play is fundamentally different than for an field player, and there is not way to gain that experience except by playing as a GK.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things, first -- practice time working on field skills is more important than game time on the field. As long as your GK is regularly practicing with their teammates and working on foot skills, passing, etc. during practice (and outside of practice), they should continue to develop. Passing drills and small-sided games are great places for your kid to get "field" touches outside of games.

Second, the reason why GK coaches recommend field playing time at younger ages is because young teams don't play through the keeper like older teams do. If your kid's team plays out from the back and through the keeper (like they should be doing at u13) your keeper should be getting a lot of "foot" touches during the games. If they don't -- that could be a sign to look for another club/team.

Of course, getting field playing time when your keeper is not in goal is ideal, but it sometimes isn't feasible as the keepers get older. While the adage that the keeper should "at least be able to make the team as a field player" is true, "make the tam" and "play regularly" are very different things as things get more competitive.

Finally, I'm not sure I fully agree with the GK coach's reasoning on field playing time. I've always been told play in the field to develop footskills. Playing in the goal in game and game-like situations allows the keeper to best develop their sense of how plays develop and where dangerous shots and crosses come from, with the added advantage that they see it from the right perspective and get to learn from their successes or failures in reacting to that situation. While seeing the play develop from the other perspective (ie as the attacker) could be helpful, I don't think its an experience keepers necessarily need on a regular basis.

I agree with all of this. Also, if this is a travel team (which I assume it is since we’re even having this discussion), some clubs are really strict about kids who try out as GKs playing as GKs rather than splitting once they reach U13. If they aren’t, they end up with kids who have decent GK skills trying out as GKs when their real goal is to be a field player and they use GK as a way to back door onto a team they wouldn’t otherwise make. Holding a hard line on GKs playing as GKs reduces the gamesmanship.

Which would be fine, if they'd said that to me when they approached me about moving him up to this team. We would have turned them down, and there would be no hard feelings. But we didn't engage in any gamemanship here.

Anonymous wrote:Two things, first -- practice time working on field skills is more important than game time on the field. As long as your GK is regularly practicing with their teammates and working on foot skills, passing, etc. during practice (and outside of practice), they should continue to develop. Passing drills and small-sided games are great places for your kid to get "field" touches outside of games.

Second, the reason why GK coaches recommend field playing time at younger ages is because young teams don't play through the keeper like older teams do. If your kid's team plays out from the back and through the keeper (like they should be doing at u13) your keeper should be getting a lot of "foot" touches during the games. If they don't -- that could be a sign to look for another club/team.

Of course, getting field playing time when your keeper is not in goal is ideal, but it sometimes isn't feasible as the keepers get older. While the adage that the keeper should "at least be able to make the team as a field player" is true, "make the tam" and "play regularly" are very different things as things get more competitive.

Finally, I'm not sure I fully agree with the GK coach's reasoning on field playing time. I've always been told play in the field to develop footskills. Playing in the goal in game and game-like situations allows the keeper to best develop their sense of how plays develop and where dangerous shots and crosses come from, with the added advantage that they see it from the right perspective and get to learn from their successes or failures in reacting to that situation. While seeing the play develop from the other perspective (ie as the attacker) could be helpful, I don't think its an experience keepers necessarily need on a regular basis.

I agree with all of this. Also, if this is a travel team (which I assume it is since we’re even having this discussion), some clubs are really strict about kids who try out as GKs playing as GKs rather than splitting once they reach U13. If they aren’t, they end up with kids who have decent GK skills trying out as GKs when their real goal is to be a field player and they use GK as a way to back door onto a team they wouldn’t otherwise make. Holding a hard line on GKs playing as GKs reduces the gamesmanship.

Anonymous wrote:

I'd talk to the coach with your son. But, I would also be sure that your son is doing everything that the coach is asking field players to do in terms of fitness and conditioning. My child is the same age and his coach requires field players to do 30 minutes of running a day, 50 push ups, 50 sit ups, and 50 burpees.


He is doing everything that's asked of him, but if the issue is that he isn't good on the field, then to me the result of that would be that during the half of the game that he's not in goal (as we agreed) he's watching, and the coach is giving him feedback at some point about what he needs to do to improve as a field player. I'd be OK with that.


Well, if the issue is technical skills, I agree, but if the issue is fitness, that doesn't make any sense. But, if he's doing everything that is asked, that's that.


I'm not sure I understand. He's definitely as fit as the other kids. I don't know enough about soccer to be able to say "he plays as well as the other kids" or "he's the best player". I mean, when he's in the goal it's obvious, but on the field I can't tell. But if they're running laps or something I can say for sure that he's got as much or more stamina as the other kids.

I'm genuinely not sure what the point of confusion is. If he is as fit as the other kids, that is not the issue. But what I am saying is that if he is not as fit as the other kids, playing him more in a game is not going to correct that. You are pbviously in the better position to say whether that is the case.

Oh, I thought you were saying that what I suggested, that the coach give him feedback on why he's not playing him on the field (other than "because you're too good in the goal") would be in order. I couldn't figure out why that feedback wouldn't work if the issue was fitness vs. technical. I think that it's easier for a kid that age to go out and improve their fitness outside of practice than it would be for him to go out and improve his fitness.

But it sounds like you're saying that increased playing time wouldn't be the solution to being less fit. I agree with that. I just don't think that's the issue. I don't think that the issue is his field playing at all. I think this is being driven mostly by the fact that he's better than the other GK.

Anonymous wrote:

I'd talk to the coach with your son. But, I would also be sure that your son is doing everything that the coach is asking field players to do in terms of fitness and conditioning. My child is the same age and his coach requires field players to do 30 minutes of running a day, 50 push ups, 50 sit ups, and 50 burpees.


He is doing everything that's asked of him, but if the issue is that he isn't good on the field, then to me the result of that would be that during the half of the game that he's not in goal (as we agreed) he's watching, and the coach is giving him feedback at some point about what he needs to do to improve as a field player. I'd be OK with that.

Well, if the issue is technical skills, I agree, but if the issue is fitness, that doesn't make any sense. But, if he's doing everything that is asked, that's that.

I'm not sure I understand. He's definitely as fit as the other kids. I don't know enough about soccer to be able to say "he plays as well as the other kids" or "he's the best player". I mean, when he's in the goal it's obvious, but on the field I can't tell. But if they're running laps or something I can say for sure that he's got as much or more stamina as the other kids.

But if the issue was that he wasn't fit enough, and wasn't keeping up, why wouldn't coach benching him (for that half) and giving him the feedback that he needs to run outside of practice, or do whatever to improve his fitness if he wants playing time on the field, make sense?

The issue definitely isn't compliance. If the coach asks him to do something, at practice or outside of practice, he does it.

I'd talk to the coach with your son. But, I would also be sure that your son is doing everything that the coach is asking field players to do in terms of fitness and conditioning. My child is the same age and his coach requires field players to do 30 minutes of running a day, 50 push ups, 50 sit ups, and 50 burpees.


He is doing everything that's asked of him, but if the issue is that he isn't good on the field, then to me the result of that would be that during the half of the game that he's not in goal (as we agreed) he's watching, and the coach is giving him feedback at some point about what he needs to do to improve as a field player. I'd be OK with that.

Well, if the issue is technical skills, I agree, but if the issue is fitness, that doesn't make any sense. But, if he's doing everything that is asked, that's that.

I think playing GK is so unique its almost impossible to get the proper attention deserved to develop all around fits not fully incorporated in a full team training with a good Gk coach present. while you get technique work with a gh coach you cant possibly get the tactical time unless the Gk coach is present and involved in full team training. I would think its more beneficial to play in team training thru the GK spot than mixing in as a field player. I would also watch as many games as possible for being the net as much as possible to see the game from the same prospective as you play. Gk is nothing like any other position on the field and is shortchanged way to much. one of the 2 most important players on the field and is by far the most undervalued.

Anonymous wrote:I'd talk to the coach with your son. But, I would also be sure that your son is doing everything that the coach is asking field players to do in terms of fitness and conditioning. My child is the same age and his coach requires field players to do 30 minutes of running a day, 50 push ups, 50 sit ups, and 50 burpees.

He is doing everything that's asked of him, but if the issue is that he isn't good on the field, then to me the result of that would be that during the half of the game that he's not in goal (as we agreed) he's watching, and the coach is giving him feedback at some point about what he needs to do to improve as a field player. I'd be OK with that.

Having said that, when he got moved up to this team, we were pretty clear that we only wanted to move if he was good enough to get time on the field, as well as the goal, and at that point the coach assured us that he was.

I'd talk to the coach with your son. But, I would also be sure that your son is doing everything that the coach is asking field players to do in terms of fitness and conditioning. My child is the same age and his coach requires field players to do 30 minutes of running a day, 50 push ups, 50 sit ups, and 50 burpees.


Do the kids actually do this?

My husband harangues my son until he does, so some do. Actually, that is unfair. He haranges him about the running until he does it. They do the situps, push ups and burpees together, and my son likes doing it with him. But my husband has a bum knee, so no running with DS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd talk to the coach with your son. But, I would also be sure that your son is doing everything that the coach is asking field players to do in terms of fitness and conditioning. My child is the same age and his coach requires field players to do 30 minutes of running a day, 50 push ups, 50 sit ups, and 50 burpees.

Do the kids actually do this?

Our coach assigns workouts on our "off days" and required the kids to text him when they have complete them.

Anonymous wrote:OP here,

I think the coach is prioritizing winning over developing my kid as a player. Which I am sure is common. Just not sure what to do.

Ding ding. That's their job, to win and recruit for the club, not to develop. It's frustrating that its become a business of exploiting kids.