Anonymous wrote:Troll is trolling.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Actually posters did. They said this is travel, win at all costs, go back to rec soccer, take the kid to karate lessons. They did. And if you don't have a complaint with what I'm saying, then you have nothing further to post. You agree with me. Great, subject closed.
No, they said it is travel and that in travel it can be expected. That doesn't mean they agree with it. That means they are describing a real expectation or experience. This just demonstrates that you fail to understand the point which is why we are still here.
I can say" it snows in Virginia in the winter". That is not a value statement. It does not imply what my opinion for or against winter actually is just that it snows. A statement of fact.
They said it was "best practice" . That is agreeing with it.
No it doesn’t. “Best practices” simply means “industry standard”. 50% of playing time is a threshold that CLUBS agree is reasonable and achievable MINIMUM amount of playing time. A club may promise more but club to club a parent should not expect less. And this applies only if the club even has a playing time policy.
None of the above at implies what I believe.
Maybe you disagree with it, so that's why you are arguing against it. Good, we are on the same page. But plenty of posters think it is correct, said players learn from the bench, that games don't matter and a host of other things. What you are saying is not in step with several posters. I'm glad you do think playing time should be better than that, so you and I agree. Great, fantastic.
Some clubs do get it right. Luckily we live in an area with many options. People can find one that works, and I encourage them to.
Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it irrelevant what people say in this forum?
All it matters what a club, team or coach does. Some play players equally, some based upon the best chance for a team to win. Some players are best at forward, midfield or backs so coaches plays them based upon this. Some coaches rotate players to every position. At the same time, some players only want to play at certain positions.
I’ve seen teams where the girls only want to play forward and some only want to play back. Most girls don’t want to play goalie. So is it fair that a goalie plays the entire game cause no one else wants to play there?
My point is, some like Coke, some like Pepsi. Some like Chik-Fil-A some like Popeyes Chicken sandwiches. Does this make one is better than the other? NO. It’s based upon individual preference. Same with travel soccer. Some people would like a certain club/team/coach for its culture and playing time, some don’t.
Don’t buy a Coka and expect it to taste like Pepsi.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Actually posters did. They said this is travel, win at all costs, go back to rec soccer, take the kid to karate lessons. They did. And if you don't have a complaint with what I'm saying, then you have nothing further to post. You agree with me. Great, subject closed.
No, they said it is travel and that in travel it can be expected. That doesn't mean they agree with it. That means they are describing a real expectation or experience. This just demonstrates that you fail to understand the point which is why we are still here.
I can say" it snows in Virginia in the winter". That is not a value statement. It does not imply what my opinion for or against winter actually is just that it snows. A statement of fact.
They said it was "best practice" . That is agreeing with it.
No it doesn’t. “Best practices” simply means “industry standard”. 50% of playing time is a threshold that CLUBS agree is reasonable and achievable MINIMUM amount of playing time. A club may promise more but club to club a parent should not expect less. And this applies only if the club even has a playing time policy.
None of the above at implies what I believe.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Some like Chik-Fil-A some like Popeyes Chicken sandwiches. Does this make one is better than the other? NO
Not sure this analogy works the way you think since the new Popeyes sandwich is vastly superior to Chik-fil-a regardless of personal preference.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Some like Chik-Fil-A some like Popeyes Chicken sandwiches. Does this make one is better than the other? NO
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Actually posters did. They said this is travel, win at all costs, go back to rec soccer, take the kid to karate lessons. They did. And if you don't have a complaint with what I'm saying, then you have nothing further to post. You agree with me. Great, subject closed.
No, they said it is travel and that in travel it can be expected. That doesn't mean they agree with it. That means they are describing a real expectation or experience. This just demonstrates that you fail to understand the point which is why we are still here.
I can say" it snows in Virginia in the winter". That is not a value statement. It does not imply what my opinion for or against winter actually is just that it snows. A statement of fact.
They said it was "best practice" . That is agreeing with it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Actually posters did. They said this is travel, win at all costs, go back to rec soccer, take the kid to karate lessons. They did. And if you don't have a complaint with what I'm saying, then you have nothing further to post. You agree with me. Great, subject closed.
No it doesn’t. “Best practices” simply means “industry standard”. 50% of playing time is a threshold that CLUBS agree is reasonable and achievable MINIMUM amount of playing time. A club may promise more but club to club a parent should not expect less. And this applies only if the club even has a playing time policy.
None of the above at implies what I believe.
I can say" it snows in Virginia in the winter". That is not a value statement. It does not imply what my opinion for or against winter actually is just that it snows. A statement of fact.
They said it was "best practice" . That is agreeing with it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Actually posters did. They said this is travel, win at all costs, go back to rec soccer, take the kid to karate lessons. They did. And if you don't have a complaint with what I'm saying, then you have nothing further to post. You agree with me. Great, subject closed.
No, they said it is travel and that in travel it can be expected. That doesn't mean they agree with it. That means they are describing a real expectation or experience. This just demonstrates that you fail to understand the point which is why we are still here.
I can say" it snows in Virginia in the winter". That is not a value statement. It does not imply what my opinion for or against winter actually is just that it snows. A statement of fact.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Actually posters did. They said this is travel, win at all costs, go back to rec soccer, take the kid to karate lessons. They did. And if you don't have a complaint with what I'm saying, then you have nothing further to post. You agree with me. Great, subject closed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.
And you keep posting that position as if it is actually up for debate.
NOBODY SAID KIDS SHOULD SIT!!
You don't need to keep stating that point as if people are disagreeing with you.
Anonymous wrote:I didn't post anything about libel. Sorry, wrong poster. And if you want to keep this going, then stop complaining about the fact it keeps going. I agree with the posters who say at 9, this playing time situation is ridiculous. And the poster is justified in looking for another place for his kid to play.