Political Correctness, and Youth Sports - Page 2

September 17, 2008, 10:26 PM

Quote:

If that is the case, then I must take all the children off the field because as I said, at that age, they all are selfish. They all take the ball for themselves and never pass. If you are saying then that I should take him off as an example to the other players, then I'd have to disagree with you. Why not take the other children who keep the ball to themselves off the field? Also from working with the kids for a long time, I've found that they are unhappy when they are losing. It makes them happy to win, as it should. They don't care who scores the goal, as long as they're ahead. By taking off the best player, the performance and morale of the entire team goes down and the team loses.

At that age, I don't think they're playing for the medals as much as taking part. The point at which games become truly competitive is the 12+ range. Sure, they probably want to win, but all the children want to play. Its a difficult task, showing right from wrong to someone with exceptional talent at such a young age in team sports: Taking him off the team give him the idea that no-one wants him to play, whilst leaving him on the team results in others not getting a turn as much as they would like to. Personally, I would let the boy play in moderation, which lets the other kids look up to him. Wait until he grows older, then start training him for real.

September 17, 2008, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sid Vicious

By taking him off the field you are enforcing the message that being selfish is bad. You can't expect him to learn that by continuing to let him play the same way. At 7, it's about fun and not winning, teams aren't chosen on ability yet, so by allowing one child to play because he is good, you are denying others from experiencing fun. Surely the good of the many comes before that of just one boy?

Im disappointed in you Placebo! At 7 alot of kids are selfish, he isn't going to wake one morning and decide "zomg I've been selfish! Thank you Coach Placebo for showing me right from wrong. Your argument doesn't apply to soccer(or Football as they say in the UK), because even the best player will sit out, they aren't going to play him for the whole game.

Quote:

So we tell kids that " sorry, you aren't good enough, infact you're shit. You don't get a medal." That's going to upset kids, and not make them motivated to play again, and some people develop from being poor players into good ones. Without motivation they would have given up.

Thats bullshit. When I was a kid, and I played Futbol(Soccer), growing up? Guess what? Only the winners got trophies, did I cry, and lose my motivation? Hell no, it made me try harder, so that I could get a trophy.

Trophies should only be given out to those who win, and even to those who improved, and showed heart(selectively of course).

Quote:

You can't apply sports to jobs. You're allowed to discriminate on ability when it comes to jobs because it affects you, and the business. Businesses are supposed to be succesful, children's sports are supposed to fun so that everyone can enjoy it, not just the one percent who are better than everyone else.

If your coaching kids in the Y, you coach the team, cheer them on, and thats it...it doesn't affect the business as much as you imply, at all. Plus you make it sound as if all the kids suck, and theres only 1 good guy, which isn't true. In reality a majority of the kids are good, but theres a smaller minority of them who are even better, those are the ones who are seperated onto different teams, then you have another small percentage, who are new to the game, and learners. No offense man, but your scenario here, is false.

I usually agree with you alot, but sorry but here I think your wrong, you and I just have a simple disagreement, sorry if I sounded a bit harsh...but hey I am just trying to get my point across =).

- Sephiroth

September 17, 2008, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Thats bullshit. When I was a kid, and I played Futbol(Soccer), growing up? Guess what? Only the winners got trophies, did I cry, and lose my motivation? Hell no, it made me try harder, so that I could get a trophy.

Times have changed now, its about 'taking part' rather than winning. I'm not sure how competitive sports and games are in the US, but in the UK, praise is given to everyone equally no matter how great their ability is. Naturally, this gives the idea that being competitive is wrong, so in theory kids would give up because all they see is equal praise.

September 18, 2008, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabranth

Times have changed now, its about 'taking part' rather than winning. I'm not sure how competitive sports and games are in the US, but in the UK, praise is given to everyone equally no matter how great their ability is. Naturally, this gives the idea that being competitive is wrong, so in theory kids would give up because all they see is equal praise.

I'm Puerto Rican, I havent really played any sports in the U.S so I wouldnt really know . Hmm it seems in the U.K you guys have a different philosophy of how things work, we could argue this till were blue in the face, and still have our opinions remain unchanged.

- Sephiroth

September 18, 2008, 3:18 AM

I agree with Erythritol, more or less. Although, I don't think children or anyone should be "made" to feel special just because they exist, rather, children should grow up being taught that they "become" special by achieving something. In our culture it is almost a kind of warped psychological Marxism that people should be filled with self-esteem on their own right. Although, if by self-esteem you mean the idea that one should generally be happy with yourself and not hate yourself - then that's fine.

The concept of self-esteem as I understand it includes the idea of believing in one's inherent self-worth, which is crap really. This is the sort of self-esteem they teach in schools because they want to prevent eating disorders, suicide etc, and it doesn't work, because those kids already know they're worthless. Everyone is until they actually achieve something.

[edit]

After reading over this thread, I couldn't help but notice the underlining Marxist argument made by Sid and Sephir8th's social-darwinist stance. However, I do agree with Sephir8th... kind of, if there isn't an element of competition, if children don't understand that they need to compete, to better themselves, to feel good, to achieve something, we wouldn't have the wonderful inventors, and products, and such in the world. For example, Tesla and Edison's rivalry. People are naturally competitive and "selfish", I'm not saying we should promote selfishness like some kind of Randist objectivism, rather, we should be promoting that children be something in life, aspire to achieve their dreams and be worth something, rather than "Oh you're special Greg, even though you've achieved nothing".