When your child sits on the bench (sports related)

[Tink888]

Does your team have a policy, for example, that all players have to play?

How do you feel if you go to see a game and your child sits on the bench the whole time?

If you bring relatives to the game and your child sits on the bench the whole time, how do you feel? While it's definately more fun to watch if they're playing, mainly we're there to support my son and the team as a whole.

Does anyone feel its o.k. for the whole team to win etc., even if it means your child sits on the bench etc. Not sure what you mean - to me, if it's a team sport, the entire team takes part in the win, just as they do in the loss.

Please keep this civil, I dont want it to turn into something not nice. Just wondering your thoughts.

I gave ds, who has been both the player and now the coach, some advice of my own.

When my kids were younger and played on rec leauges, everyone got playing time. Now, my older son played jr. high football for the first time this year and he spent a lot of time on the bench. To be honest, I expected that and went he went out for the team I told him he should be prepared to not expect a lot of playing time. It was his first year and he had a lot to learn. He was at every practice and he worked his butt off and those few minutes of playing time he did get during a game were priceless. He was dissappointed, but that's life and it was a good lesson to learn. At the end of the season, he was still glad he did it, he learned a lot and he's a better player.

 

[castleview]

In the town I grew up in, the Little League had a division for 15-18 yr. olds who weren't good enough for the high school team or didn't get much play on the high school team. Quite a few kids did LL, improved, and got spots on the HS team by their senior year.

Personally, I don't think the high school coach needs to consider whether the grandparents are coming or not.

 

[ICF]

Maybe I should clarify, Its competitive and its for 9th grade and up

Then no, I don't think in most cases all the kids should play.....

....unless.....

It's a travel type of team that costs the parents a good chunk of $$$ to have their kid be on the team.....only to sit on the bench. In those cases, I think even though they are competitive (very much so) that a way to give all kids at least 5-10 mins a game needs to happen.

By the time you are in high school in a in a competitive enviroment there aren't many leagues where all kids play, even in CYO leagues some kids get lots more PT then others.

At that age, if you are playing for some type of championship at the end then the better kids would play. I would hope that the "bench kids" would play at least some minutes here and there, but that is always the case.

As for family coming to watch the games....I would let them know upfront that the child isn't likely to play much, so they don't expect to come and see the next all-star and end up disappointed.

 

[Cool-Beans]

Maybe I should clarify, Its competitive and its for 9th grade and up

By that point, you play if you're good and you don't if you aren't.

 

[KAMLEM]

By that point, you play if you're good and you don't if you aren't.

That's it in a nutshell!

 

[mjkacmom]

I gave ds, who has been both the player and now the coach, some advice of my own.

And your thought are?

 

[TomLovesBecky]

I realize better players are going to play more often, but I would not put a kid on a team that didn't play everyone at least half the time. IF they are good enough for the team, then they should play. I totally understand if they aren't up to snuff for the team in the first place. No one wants to lose because Johnny can't dribble or Mary can't catch. But why not just make a separate team for the better players? I have one star athlete out of all my kids, and he plays every minute of every game in every sport. He is usually the best or one of the best players on every team. My others don't usually play the whole game unless there aren't enough people to substitute, but they don't get upset. They get to play enough, they are not benchwarmers, just taking turns. And they figure their brother is just a sports freak so he isn't a good person to measure themselves against. So yes, I'd be upset if my kid didn't play at all in a game. How demoralizing! I'd find a different team if possible so he or she could practice skills and contribute something on par with the others.

Oh, I just read that it's 9th grade and up, competitive. Is there a recreation (less competitive) league he could join? Clearly the school is not going to lose a game by playing someone with less ability.

 

[Pin Wizard]

When DS was little and played with the Y, it was...everyone gets playing time. Now with lacrosse in high school, we're ready for bench time since it's the first he's played. His coach is happy and encouraging with his playing. Our first meeting with everyone he said...We play like varsity. Okay...bench time. LOL!

However, I saw their wins/losses from last year. They won 2 of 12 games. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...some new blood on the field might be a good thing!

 

[MOMTOMOOTOO]

In rec, everyone plays. In our competitve travel teams they do not. My 2 daughters knew going in, if they make the team, chances were good they wouldn't get alot of play time. They both agreed and still tried out and made it. The 12 y/o is pretty good and does get some time in besides 5th quarter. My husband is asst coach to the 9 y/o team and she plays some but not nearly as much as she woould like. When she complains we tell her she can either not try out next year or she needs to stop complaining.

 

[debster812]

Up to age 7, I think they should all get to play. After that, the kids who are good play and the ones who aren't sit on the bench.

SEVEN? That's a bit young. I would have to respectfully, but vehemently disagree with you on that.

DS is 11 (almost 12), and at age 7, on the soccer field, he was the kid running AWAY from the ball. Now, he will play Keeper, and any other position on the field that his coach needs him to, and he's developed into a fairly decent player.

To answer the OPs question:

For recreational/instructional soccer leagues, in our town, it's equal playing time, everyone gets to play at least 50% of the game.

For competitive and travel soccer teams, we have a 20% rule. Each rostered player must play at least 12 minutes out of a 60 minute game. These teams are formed from tryouts, and there are stronger and weaker players, but they all deserve to play part of the game.

 

[DawnCt1]

I live in a town where many of the Little League coaches, coach so their kids, and their kids friends, can play key positions, and be picked for the All Star team. There are a lot of men who are willing to be coaches, so it has been a"competitive" position, at least in the past. I have four DSs so I have seen it, year, after year, after year. Some of my DSs have had fabulous coaches that place kids in positions based on ability. Other times, they have had coaches that place their kids, (and their kids friends, or the kids of their friends) in positions based on relationships. This is actually an objective opinion, because many of these kids never get selected for jr. varsity or Varsity when they reach high school. ALL of my DSs have played JV and V. The final straw for me, was when DS#4 was picked to "fill out the friends all star team". He sat on the bench and we watched the team lose. After two games, I went up to the coach and said, "you will either play my kid or he isn't coming back. I am watching you lose games so you can fill your social obligations and we aren't going to participate in that anymore". He didn't like it. I embarrassed him, but everyone who knew DS#4 knew he was the better player. At the risk of not having a team, he played him and it was worth his while. The only regret I have is that I didn't speak up sooner. BTW, there were only two kids on that team that make JV and V, and one of them was my kid. So it all depends why your kid is being benched. If they are benched because they can't play and its competitive, that's one thing. If its for "social reasons", that is entirely different.