I hate high school rules.

[fernb8]

I believe the helmet idea came from a "doctor" in California who claimed headers create irreprepiable brain injuries. I cant believe the rule about mouthguards, I have never heard of that before.

I dont mind the unlimited subbing because it allows a coach to make adjustments by taking a player out and discussing tactics, etc. It also allows the starting 11 to stay fresh throughout the season by using the guys on the bench.

[Benedict XVI]

Originally posted by fernb8
I dont mind the unlimited subbing because it allows a coach to make adjustments by taking a player out and discussing tactics, etc. It also allows the starting 11 to stay fresh throughout the season by using the guys on the bench.

It's great if you have 20 guys on your bench. It stinks if you have a squad of 14 or 15.

Unlimited subbing is one thing, but there should be a limit to the bench size if they aren't going to limit substitutions. Last team we played had more kids on the bench than we had kids total.

If they are worried about their going a full 80, then they should make the haves 30 minutes or something. All this subbing is for sucks.

I "discuss" with my players from the sideline, I don't need to take them out for that. ;)

[neilgrossman]

Originally posted by Vicar


Unlimited subbing is one thing, but there should be a limit to the bench size if they aren't going to limit substitutions. Last team we played had more kids

High schools sports are about participation. I think it is admirable that the rules are set up to encourage the coach to let everyone play. That's how most youth rec leagues do it. That is how most adult rec leagues do it.

I doubt anyone thinks all those HS rules about uniforms and the singals for infractions are necessary, though. It's just something extra for the ref to study the night before a game.

[Alberto]

Originally posted by fernb8
I believe the helmet idea came from a "doctor" in California who claimed headers create irreprepiable brain injuries. I cant believe the rule about mouthguards, I have never heard of that before.

I dont mind the unlimited subbing because it allows a coach to make adjustments by taking a player out and discussing tactics, etc. It also allows the starting 11 to stay fresh throughout the season by using the guys on the bench.


The unlimited substitution rule is terrible once players reach high school level. They need to learn to play for extended periods of time. Coaches need to learn tactics and how to teach players how to conserve energy instead of having players playing at a frantic pace.

[fernb8]

Originally posted by Alberto



The unlimited substitution rule is terrible once players reach high school level. They need to learn to play for extended periods of time. Coaches need to learn tactics and how to teach players how to conserve energy instead of having players playing at a frantic pace.

I dont think players need to learn how to play for an extended time at the high school level. If the schedule is strong enough then obviously the coach wont need to sub, but if a team is winning
8-0 whats the point of your starters getting in the full 80 or 90 mins? You might as well get your reserves and/or younger players some experience that might be needed later down the road.


I "discuss" with my players from the sideline, I don't need to take them out for that.


I am sure most coaches "discuss" and "instruct" from the sideline but its nice to have the ability to talk to a player in a one-on-one situation at times.

[rtung]

They should use baseball-style substitutions, then.

Once-in, once-out.

[dude8]

you ain't heard nothing yet....
In Arizona, state championships that end in ties after overtime end with co-champions! There are no shoot-outs. This is not a misprint. happened to us last year...utterly out of this world decision -making going on in my state.
As for unqualified refs-where do you start?
But, at least we get to play.
That must be another thread....

[Alberto]

Originally posted by fernb8


I dont think players need to learn how to play for an extended time at the high school level. If the schedule is strong enough then obviously the coach wont need to sub, but if a team is winning
8-0 whats the point of your starters getting in the full 80 or 90 mins? You might as well get your reserves and/or younger players some experience that might be needed later down the road.


I "discuss" with my players from the sideline, I don't need to take them out for that.


I am sure most coaches "discuss" and "instruct" from the sideline but its nice to have the ability to talk to a player in a one-on-one situation at times.

I see way too much substitution in most matches. Players need to learn how to play together as a team. You can't do that if every 10 minutes you are subbing players in and out of games. There is no continuity.

[firstshirt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dude8
you ain't heard nothing yet....
In Arizona, state championships that end in ties after overtime end with co-champions! There are no shoot-outs. This is not a misprint. happened to us last year...utterly out of this world decision -making going on in my state.
As for unqualified refs-where do you start?
But, at least we get to play.
That must be another thread..

In CT the girls play no overtime in championship games, they are co champs if tied at the end of regulation. the boys play two overtimes and then if still tied, co champs are awarded. Sometimes i wish it was the other way around. back in 97 we lost the state title with 23 seconds left in the second overtime. to play 99 plus minutes of soccer and come away empty handed sucks big time!!!!

[thurd]

Originally posted by rtung
They should use baseball-style substitutions, then.

Once-in, once-out.
i believe college soccer uses that?

[dude8]

Does anyone know the thought process behind the "no shoot-outs" in championship games?
I would love to get to the bottom of this. Our official answer is that it puts too much pressure on the players, but we have shoot-outs in the quarters and semis, where just as much is at stake.
And, on a philosophical note, what does that teach the players? That there are no losers? Brillant!

[Dr. Wankler]

Originally posted by dude8
Our official answer is that it puts too much pressure on the players, but we have shoot-outs in the quarters and semis, where just as much is at stake.

Interesting. Are state championships for basketball and football televised in your state? Do they have overtime in case of ties? Just curious, as I suspect playing in a televised game might just be at least as pressure-packed than taking a PK in a shootout might be.

thurd: Most of the college games I've been to don't seem to have that rule in effect. I wonder if it varies depending on the conference.

[Brownswan]

I had no idea that high school soccer was so screwed up across the country. I realize it's a thrill for adolescents to play for their school, earn a letter, and enjoy some peer support, but I have to believe talented players would be better off seeking adult rec teams to play on or quality u-14, u-16, etc. clubs.

I guess it's best to simply accept it as psuedo-soccer -- meaningless, accept for the exercise it provides.

[Brownswan]

--- EXCEPT for the exercise it provides. Maybe I shouold find time to audit a few high-school English courses! It's what they do best; they should leave soccer alone.

[SousaJP]

Originally posted by thurd

i believe college soccer uses that?

nope. the NCAA allows players to re-enter the game 1 time each half, and again in OT if the game is tied after regulation.

[dude8]

Originally posted by Brownswan
I had no idea that high school soccer was so screwed up across the country. I realize it's a thrill for adolescents to play for their school, earn a letter, and enjoy some peer support, but I have to believe talented players would be better off seeking adult rec teams to play on or quality u-14, u-16, etc. clubs.

I guess it's best to simply accept it as psuedo-soccer -- meaningless, accept for the exercise it provides.


At least where I am from, clubs run first season, H.S. teams run second, and clubs again for the third season. Most of the successful H.S. teams are basically club teams that have played together almost year round. The talented players that you speak of are getting quality coaching for most of the year, and it shows in the H.S. matches. I wouldn't call it psuedo, or meaningless, just different. My point was that not all H.S soccer is meaningless, but most H.S officiating is sadly lacking, and we have non-soccer playing organizations making decisions that are laughable.
And now, I will get off my soapbox.

[fernb8]

Originally posted by Alberto


I see way too much substitution in most matches. Players need to learn how to play together as a team. You can't do that if every 10 minutes you are subbing players in and out of games. There is no continuity.

Obviously we will have to agree to disagree, while you see the negatives of unlimited subbing, I see the positives. I think there are enough games in a season to bring about continuity, of course its easy when some areas are not as restricted on the amount of games they can play when compared to other schools/areas.

[Becks7]

we play with unlimited subs but we don't make too much subs.

[Elroy]

I love all this whining and crying about high school soccer. It's the American version of Euro-snobbery.

I like the following about high school soccer:

1. Their scores get reported in the paper - sometimes there are even stories. Very few, if any, club teams get any coverage at all.
2. They play at night under the lights.
3. They perform before decent ( even large ) crowds.
4. A responsible organization watches out for the well being of the players academically.

Yeah, H.S. soccer is not good everywhere. Neither is club.

I like the idea of co-champions instead of a shootout. No one can convince me that a shootout has anything at all with determining who is the better team. It is no more a part of soccer than a quarterback sack. If two teams are still tied after 120 mins, then maybe there isn't that much difference. I've been on both sides of shootouts and if someone must advance in the tournament, I'd just as soon see a coin toss. To say to posterity that team A is better than team B b/c of PK's is an intolerable cannard.

I also like the idea of having to sub a player on a caution. These are not seasoned pros. I like the idea of some sort of mandatory time out to allow the coach to educate his player about self control.

There are a lot of silly rules peculiar to the H.S. game, but I put up with them for the sake of the kids.

[Bill Archer]

As a working HS Referee, I see compliance with the "signals" thing all over the chart.

Some guys are giving them every call, some only occasionally and some of us (blush, blush) absolutely refuse. The authorities are threatening to suspend anybody they catch not doing it. OK by me, it's just stupid.

The newest one came down this week: they've banned adidas "Fingersave" type gloves. We are supposed to check.